a report from Vice Mayor Jan Devereux, Chair of the Transportation & Public Utilities Committee, for a public hearing held on September 12, 2018 to discuss the guiding policy and safety priorities for regulating and permitting shared electric scooters to operate in Cambridge

ATTACHMENT A TRANSPORTATION & PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE MEETING -AGENDA ~ Wednesday, September 12, 2018 1:00 PM Sullivan Chamber CALL OF THE MEETING The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee will conduct a public hearing to discuss the guiding policy and safety priorities for regulating and permitting shared electric scooters to operate in Cambridge. OPENING REMARKS Coming remarks will be made by Vice Mayor Devereux, Chair of the Transportation and Public Vilities Introductions will be made. STAFF PRESENTATION Presentation on the Pilot Permit Program and safety and operational considerations. DISCUSSION Discussion and questions from City Councillors and guests from Bird and Lime. PUBLIC COMMENT NEXT STEPS Wrap-up discussion and next steps. ADJOURNMENT City of Cambridge Page 1

AMACHMENTB Vice Mayor Derrett Thank you all for coming. I appreciate that this is a topic that has generated a high degree of interest and no small amount of debate in the media, over email and among residents in cities all over the country who are witnessing the evolution -- some would say disruption, some would say innovation -- of "mobility." It's new, it's different and for that reason alone is bound to raise questions and concerns along with hope that the ability to ride a shared electric scooter for that critical last mile will changes lives and commutes for the better. I share some of the concerns but also the hope, so I would call myself an optimistic realist in approaching how to responsibly integrate this new technology into our menu of transporation options. Since Bird released its flock on our streets without invitation this summer, our staff has been working to develop recommendations for a pilot program that could set the groundrules to permit companies to operate legally while holding them accountable for managing their fleets -- including the number of scooters, how they are parked, the hours of operation and the security and privacy of user data, and for educating their users on riding safely and courteously. I am not naive in thinking there won't be some problems during a future pilot. I expect that any company that applies for a permit will be committed to partnering closely with the city to operate responsibly and to talior their opertions to Cambridge's needs and conditions. Before we move to the staff presentation I would like to clarify and correct something I said in an interview with WBUR yesterday, regarding the timing of when a piiot could begin. Strictly interpreted, the current state law for "scooters" requires them to be equipped with a rear brake light and turn indicators. At this time the type of electric stand-on scooter we are discussing today may not have these both these lights. My understanding is that this law was written for the type of scooter you sit on like a moped, not for a stand-on motorized scooter. So until the state law changes or MassDOT issues a statement clarifying legislative intent and giving cities the ability to run pilot programs while the law is being brought up to date, then we are between a rock and a hard place. Then into Loure

AITACHMENTC Source: TheGadgetFlow.com • Lime-S Electric Scooter Share in Cambridge September 12, 2018 Transportation and Public Utilities Committee Hearing

Source: Laura A. Oda/P y Area News Group Source: Recode.net Scooter Share has arrived

Source: Rachid Jalayanadeja / Shutterstock.com Scooter Companies Lyft Skip Bird Spin Lime Scoot Jump Ofo • Hopr Razor .....Uber Ridecell Uscooters

Fun Upsides Convenient Easy to get around

Challenges Safety/injuries Sidewalk riding Careless parking

Source: James Earlywine, Indystar.com 20, 2018 operating surrounding communities and operation ceased Bird declined to cease operation intention to seek license to operate not obtained a license to operate in Cambridge, the city asked Bird to stop Both Bird and Lime have indicated their Bird; Somerville also ordered Bird to stop A Cease and Desist letter was then sent to After determining that the scooters do not Both cities started impounding the scooters Scooter deployment in Cambridge and currently comply with state law and Bird did Without notice to the City, Bird placed about 100 scooters in Cambridge/Somerville in July

Source: © Bloomberg via Getty Images State regulations and sunset ride on sidewalks signals and brake light upon by the operator • Definition: "Motorized scooter"': human propulsion; max speed 20 mph Chapter 90, Section 1E, which requires turn Only allowed to be operated between sunrise Other characteristics of state law: Users must has handlebars and is designed to be stood or sat Scooters do not currently meet requirements of any 2 wheeled tandem or 3 wheeled device, that powered by an electric or gas powered motor that wear helmet, have a driver's license, and cannot is capable of propelling the device with or without

Park paths) regulations: prohibited $50 fine for a violation people with disabilities Users must wear a helmet City Regulations before sunrise and a half hour after sunset Parked scooters must not restrict safe and Can only be used by individuals who are 16+ Cannot be operated on sidewalks (except to unobstructed pedestrian access nor impede • Allowed to operate only between a half hour Scooters can travel at max speed of 25 MPH off-road paths (such as Linear Path or Danehy enter or exit adjacent property) or in parks or pass another scooter going in same direction Only one rider at a time and are not allowed to Other characteristics of the Traffic Department's Scooters are not allowed anywhere bicycles are Source: Luz Lazo/The Washington Post

versus new regulations Current ability to regulate subject to the Traffic Articles XXII and XXIII section 12.08.020 of the scooters on city property Merchandise permit under session until January 2019 Legislature is not in formal the requirements for scooters could be permitted to operate required to obtain a Display of or scooters are equipped with If the State Legislature amends Municipal Code in order to park Department's regulations under turn signals and stop light), they Scooter companies would also be

five dollars annually. (Ord. 1322, 5/18/2009; Prior code 5 3-2) City Council and issued by the Superintendent of Streets. public highway in the City without a permit granted by the 12.08.020 - Display of merchandise • A. No merchandise shall be displayed within the limits of any Effective June 1, 2009, the fee for the permit shall be seventy-

Source: Nathan Smith/Daily Bruin senior staff Santa Monica What other cities are doing with snowy climates yet without prior permission regulations has become clear. Have looked in detail at NACTO Providence, San Francisco, and Santa Monica in September 2017 scores of other US cities, with or orders and/or fines; need for new Austin TX, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Scooters have recently launched in Scooter share was first launched in Guidance and regulations in 6 US cities: Scooter share has not operated in cities Many cities have issued cease and desist

• Fees regulate In case of Number of (Min, max) agreement • Tools used to • Costs/revenue- scooter per day violations/fines sharing agreement Minimum rides per Duration of license operators/scooters Program power options agreement Data-sharing Data security Insurance and considerations 1 indemnification • Operating Zones Safety measures Parking and locking Maximum speed and

Source: Curbed LA program company • Company with users • Community information deployment engagement communication • Equal access to • Equitable vehicle eligible programs Program • Pricing and income- process • Website with City • Company to support • Public input considerations 2 communication • City staff needed • Winter operations NACTO: https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/NACTO-Shared-Active-Transportation-Guidelines.pdf

Source: Cincinnati Enquirer surrounding communities to participate Collaboration with MAPC and set of communities, etc. all micromobility devices process to permit scooters? Options could include Model similar regulations/programs New program/regulations ready Boston, Somerville and Brookline have expressed desire to develop Consider regulatory framework for Regulations, an MOU on behalf of a role and invite other municipalities MAPC has offered to play convening early 2019; coincide with legislative

Source: Bird BIR Discussion

ATTACHMENT D BIRD September 12, 2018 Testimony in front of the Cambridge City Council's Transportation Committee on electric scooters in Cambridge Good afternoon Vice Mayor Devereux and Councilors. My name is Hannah Smith, and I am a Government Relations Manager at Bird. I'd like to reinforce and add to much of what has been already presented in today's hearing with respect to e-scooters coming to Cambridge. Bird's mission is to get cars off the road to help reduce traffic and carbon emissions in the cities and communities in which we operate. We believe Cambridge would be a fantastic place for our service to provide more sustainable mobility options for people looking to get out of cars and more easily get around town. Safety is Bird's number one priority, so we invest heavily in our riders and communities. Upon first launching in our earliest cities, Bird initiated the industry-leading Save Our Sidewalks Pledge to demonstrate our company's commitment to sustainable growth and our interest in being good partners to the cities where we operate. As part of this pledge, Birds are collected every night for charging and inspection. which helps us maintain a healthy fleet for our riders and ensures our scooters aren't on the road at night when collisions are more likely. We do this daily pickup also to ensure that vehicles are consistently re-positioned to reduce clutter on sidewalks and parked safely and out of the public's right of way. This pledge also commits Bird to increasing the number of vehicles in market only when every vehicle on the road has been used on average at least three times per day. We remove vehicles when they are underutilized to ensure supply truly meets demand.

Lastly, the Save Our Sidewaiks Pledge promises to remit $i per vehicles per day to city governments so that they can build more bike lanes and invest in the kind of infrastructure we need to meet our shared goals of getting cars off the road and promoting more environmentally friendly transportation. We have already seen the success of our service in cities across the country. For instance, in just one year of operating in the city of Los Angeles, 3.2 million Bird rides have been completed, resulting in 4.6 million miles ridden. This means over 4.1 million pounds of carbon emissions were avoided from entering the city's already polluted air. We also consistently see that the average Bird ride is roughly 1.5 miles. This means our vehicles are providing a real solution to last-mile transportation issues that have been prevalent in towns and cities throughout America. Bird hopes to be a partner to Cambridge, working together to advance our shared goals of building cleaner, safer, smarter streets. We recently launched our Govlech platform to formalize our commitment to working closely with the cities in which we operate. Through this platform we will share anonymized data with city officials and work together to improve our technology so that Cambridge is best served by Bird. in addition to technological support. Bird will make every effort to provide on-the-ground support through community outreach and in-person interactions. Where possible, Bird can host helmet giveaways and safety events, partner with local business and organizations to encourage safe riding, and offer in-person support for local officials as we continue to solidify our partnership. Thank you so much for allowing me the opportunity to speak on Bird's behalf - l'd be happy to take questions at this time.

Lopez, Donna AITACHMENTE From: Kelley, Craig Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 4:26 PM To: Devereux, Jan Cc: Gutierrez, Mark; Lopez, Donna Subject: Wednesday's meeting Hey Jan: I have to take my mom to a multi-hour dental appointment on Wednesday and am unlikely to make much, if any of your Shared Electric Scooter meeting. Thank you very much for discussing this important and timely topic. In lieu of my comments in person, I am submitting some thoughts in writing. 1. What is the legal reasoning behind using a sidewalk business permit for regulating shared electric scooters. 12.08 is titled "ADVERTISING SIGNS AND DISPLAYS." Having read the relevant city regulations, that seems like a huge stretch to me as the regulations are aimed at things like barber poles and sign awnings, not bikes or scooters. We heard Mr. Barr specifically say that people can rent out their personal vehicles on City streets via peer-to-peer platforms with no more City oversight than a city parking sticker and I am struggling to understand why we have added scrutiny for shared scooters. Misusing city regulations because we can't find something directly on point, as I think has happened, is bad policy and sets bad precedent for future regulatory efforts. 2. State law prohibits riding a motorized scooter, whether electric or gas powered, on a public way between sunrise and sunset. https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/Partl/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section1E. As long as that is state law, I don't see any reasonable way we're going to get motorized scooters, shared use or not, to be reasonably available in Cambridge. If we want these scooters to work here, and I do, we're going to have to change state law. 3. Fundamentally, it seems like the real problems with dockless, and to a lesser extent docked, electric scooters exist whether they are shared or not. These problems are: a. Riding on the sidewalk b. Leaving scooters scattered about on the sidewalk and elsewhere c. Weaving in and out of traffic d. Small wheels, narrow handlebars and challenging weight distribution make handling difficult e. Acceleration and braking are not intuitive f. Helmets are frequently not used by riders g. People can ride these vehicles at fairly high speeds with no formal licensing or training. This situation is not unlike people on bicycles, but it does seem like the nature of electric scooters can lead to more problematic uses at times 4. Expanding on the point made above, many of the challenges motorized scooters face, aside from the nighttime restrictions, are shared by other Micromobility platforms such as Blue Bike and Micromobility users in general. For example, cyclists of all stripes, to include users of Blue Bike, regularly run red lights, carry packages in their arms, use their phones and do similar dangerous things that are illegal while riding. If we are concerned about Shared Scooter riders operating safely, we need also to be similarly concerned about how people use other mobility devices. 5. Data sharing is concern with all shared mobility platforms. If Turu and Getaround are allowed to use City Streets to conduct peer-to-peer car rentals, we should have the same data sharing issues with them that we do with Bird or anyone else. The same challenge exists for equitable access. 6. Infrastructure for electric personal mobility devices needs to be developed whether they are shared or not. We need greater access to charging stations for electric bikes, electric scooters, electric wheelchairs and so forth so that people do not, for example, have to dangle extension cords four stories down an apartment building to 1

charge their wheelchair. Given the weight of most electric bikes, carrying them upstairs can be almost impossible so people in walk-up buildings who lack garages and/or electric outlets on the ground level cannot reasonably expect to charge their electric bikes at home if their model does not have an easily removeable and transportable battery. 7. Parking for all sorts of personal mobility devices is challenging. We absolutely need to dedicate on-street space to providing more parking for bikes, scooters, etc. We do this a bit with our bike corrals and I think we need to do much more of it, with a focus on providing charging options at the same time. 8. Our bike parking rules need a review and, in general better enforcement, to include better notice describing storage rules in business districts and removal of abandoned bikes. Section 12.9, for example, specifically prohibits parking motorized vehicles from using bike-specific locking stations and yet we see that happen all the time. We need to clarify, and possibly change, who can lock what to where and then start making that the community norm. http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/Transportation/gettingaroundcambridge/bybike/rulesoftheroad/bik eregulations.aspx 9. The difference between "Motorized Bicycle" and "Motorized Scooter" under Chapter 90, Section I seems really unclear. Electric bikes, for example, with or without pedals, are considered motorized bicycles but electric scooters, which may or may not be sat on, are not. I cannot differentiate between the two, but our parking regulations seem to require people to understand that difference. Fundamentally, I think the emergence of electric personal mobility devices, shared or not, is going to expand drastically in the near future. Our street use discussions cannot continue to be cars versus bikes versus pedestrians, with bikes lumped into the all-inclusive 'alternative transportation' category. Nor can our infrastructure changes continue to push non-automobile uses to narrow, constrained spaces on the side of our streets. We need to start thinking about managing transportation by speed rather than by form and, at the same time, dropping acceptable speeds in Cambridge significantly. I am very excited about and supportive of this new shift in urban transportation and I encourage City staff to ask for whatever expert resources they feel are needed, from more planning and legal staff to contracted specialized support, to allow Cambridge to move aggressively into this new transportation future. We also need to work closely with Boston and other local communities as well as the state to determine which state laws should be changed and how. This work, I feel, is not something we can stretch over upcoming years. The challenge faces us now and we need to address it now. Other communities throughout the nation have taken different tacks on this challenge and there is already an emerging field of best regulatory practices that we can draw from to create our own Cambridge-tailored programs. 1look forward to being a part of this discussion as it evolves. Many thanks. Craig 2

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENT From: Jennie Nevin < [email removed]> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 3:28 PM To: City Council Lopez, Donna Bird scooters Subject: Hi Cambridge Council, I will be unable to attended the hearing on the Bird scooters so I wanted to instead send these comments for the public record. I experienced the scooters on a visit to DC and not only loved using them but also appreciated what they did for the city. Docked (and increasingly non-docked) bikes have done a lot for last mile connectivity, but the scooters were, to me, the missing piece of the puzzle. They are easier for women to ride when wearing work outfits (try biking in a pencil skirt!), easier for people who may be mobility constrained and unable to bike, and generally just really fun. Fun is arguably not a top tier policy goai, but in the end it is a key ingredient to a community's vitality. I understand that you will need to property regulate them but | urge you to expediently vote on an extensive pilot program (let's get these things going before the snow comes!) I also ask that you not aliow the restrictions of any introductory program to defeat the concept before it even gets off the ground (if there are too few scooters in the network during a "pilot," that would surely make it less likely that they will capture their due level of interest and enthusiasm). Thank you for your consideration - I eagerly await the ability to use the scooters in my neighborhood (Broadway at Inman St!) Thanks, Jennie Citizen, Cambridge

Lopez, Donna ATTACUmENT G From: lan Schneider < [email removed]> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2018 12:44 PM To: Lopez, Donna Subject: Comments: 9/12 Meeting, Electric Scooters Hi, I am unfortunately not able to attend the Council Subcommittee meeting today but I wanted to send my comments and thoughts. In order for Cambridge to meet its goals for CO2 emissions, it needs to work quickly and effectively to support low-carbon transportation and improve infrastructure for low-carbon modes like bicycles and electric scooters. I think the city should move quickly to implement a permitting system for electric scooters that are compliant with state laws, enabling companies to offer scooter rentals within 4-8 weeks. I think the city should also draft an approach to work with state legislatures or the MassDOT so that existing scooter models (like those from Bird) that are not currently legal in MA will be authorized for use on Cambridge roads by the Spring. I think the city should prepare to utilize 1-2 parking spaces per block in busy areas as drop-off zones for scooter rentals. Alternatively, locations near crosswalks could be utilized for this to discourage drivers parking illegally close to the corner. I think the city should rededicate itself to the bicycle network plan proposed in 2015. Progress has been slow and halting, which makes our roads less safe and more choked with vehicle traffic. Bike network growth will be crucial for encouraging more usage of bicycles and other low-carbon modes. Bike network growth should also encourage usage by multiple modes by making sure lanes are wide enough to facilitate safe passing. Thank you for your hard work on this important issue, and for everything else you do for our city. Warm Regards, Ian lan Schneider PhD Student, Institute for Data, Systems, and Society, MIT Research Assistant, EECS, MIT http://www.mit.edu/~ischneid/ [phone removed]

H ATTACWMENT From: James in Cambridge <[email removed]> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2018 3:02 AM To: Devereux, Jan Cc: City Council Subject: Comments for the Transportation & Public Utilities Committee Public Hearing on Regulating Scooters & Bikes, 9/12/2018. September 12, 2018 To: The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee From: James Williamson, Cambridge, MA Re: Public Hearing on Regulating Scooters and Rental Bikes Dear Vice Mayor Devereux and Members of the Committee: Please include these written comments with the public record for Wednesday's (today's) Public Hearing on regulating scooters and (some newer rental) bikes in Cambridge. I understand the growing interest in, and attention being paid to, regulating seemingly new forms of transportation in our city. It makes sense to begin thinking about these "new" modes of transportation and how to manage and regulate the "deployment" and use of them in our city, sooner rather than later. However, is there an assumption being made here that the City of Cambridge have already done an adequate job of regulating the widespread and growing use of existing bicycles in Cambridge? As in, "We've done enough, and now it's time to 'move on,' to scooters and new forms of rental bikes?" I think not. It seems to me that before we move on to these newer types of vehicles, we should first demonstrate that we've established a solid grip on the regulation of existing bicycles, which we do not currently have. How much sense does it make to start trying to control scooters when we don't even have adequate control over the many more bicycles already in use in the city?? We need better regulations, and better enforcement of existing bicycle rules and behavior, and we shouldn't allow some jazzy new "trendy" topic to distract us from achieving safety with what we already have. For example: 1) Are we satisfied with the extent to which bicyclists are respecting red lights, crosswalks and one-way streets in Cambridge? 2) Are we satisfied with the extent to which bicyclists respect the prohibition against riding on sidewalks (where that prohibition exists)? 3) Do we not need to improve the regulation of where sidewalk bicycling is

restricted so that the rules are more easily intelligible? I.e., Instead of the current patchwork of "prohibited" and "permitted" sections of sidewalk along the Mass. Ave. Corridor (based on "Business Districts"), wouldn't it make much better sense to just prohibit bicycling on the entire sidewalk throughout the entire Mass. Ave. Corridor? Thereby making it easier and simpler for everyone to understand the rule, and for the police to enforce it?? 4) Should we not explore "permits" for bicycles, as is apparently being suggested now for some of these new rental bikes or scooters?? This would facilitate better enforcement of existing rules, and would have the benefit of allowing better recovery of stolen bikes, as well. 5) This could be linked to some sort of mandatory "Riders Ed" for bicyclists in Cambridge, to ensure better understanding of the rules of the road we should be insisting cyclists respect, but which many so frequently ignore. 6) Should there not also be a modest "bicycle permit fee" for bicycles, which would help defray the cost of the growing infrastructure being demanded by bicyclists, and increasingly (if not always sensitively) implemented throughout the city? License or Permit, Riders Ed, and a modest Fee, could be combined to create a saner and safer (and more enforceable) environment for all. 7) Do we not need the police in Cambridge to do a much better job of enforcing the rules currently in place for bicyclists, before we go around making new ones?? "A law that isn't enforced isn't a law." These are just a few ideas that have surfaced in conversations I've had with many different Cantabrigians in recent months. Before we rush off to regulate the latest "craze" in transportation, let's show that we can get a firmer and more convincing grip on the transportation -- and the continuing associated, evident, problems - we already have. Thank you for the consideration of the Committee and of the Council. Sincerely, James Williamson North Cambridge