Transit and Micromobility (2021)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

83   Partnership Toolkit As this study has established, transit agencies and cities have differing roles and interests when it comes to interacting with private micromobility operators. In short, cities regulate, while transit agencies partner. In most cases, the overall parameters regarding whether and how micromobility operates in a jurisdiction will be out of a transit agency’s hands, so the agency must work closely with municipal departments to ensure that transit agency interests are considered as part of micromobility’s regulation. For public transit agencies that are interested in going further and pursuing more direct engagement with micromobility providers, this Partnership Toolkit proposes a set of concrete steps that will help agencies decide on why and how to build micromobility partnerships, define goals, and measure success. (In addition to distilling the findings of the main body of this study, the Partnership Toolkit draws on partnership frameworks and recommendations outlined in several TCRP and SUMC publications: Curtis et al. 2019; Gururaja and Faust 2019; Peterson 2019; Murphy et al. 2019; and Yanocha et al. 2018.) In addition to suggested steps and decision-support tools for establishing a micromobility partnership, this chapter also includes a concise list of the case studies and pilot examples in the report as well as links to key partnership and procurement documents, agreements, administrative rules and regulations, and statutes that are available. Toolkit 1. Prepare for Partnership Decision Tree: Whether to Pursue a Partnership Figure 33 provides a suggested means for assembling the information and making the initial decision on whether a micromobility partnership is something that makes sense to pursue. Each of the nodes is described later in this step, and boxes marked “checklist” refer to supporting checklists and explanations on the following pages of the toolkit. If a “go” decision is indicated, the checklists will provide key information needed to support decisions in later steps. Define the public goals or policy objectives a micromobility project would help reach or the agency challenge it will help address. (A fuller treatment of these goals and policy objectives can be found in Chapter 2: Regulatory and Policy Review, particularly in the Transit Agency’s Regulatory Role section; examples of individual agencies’ goals can be found in Chapter 5: Agency–Micromobility Partnership Approaches. Key studies and pilot examples cited in the text are listed at the end of this toolkit.) Whether an agency is considering soliciting proposals or has been approached by a vendor, it should be able to articulate the problem a micromobility partnership would solve. Ideally, these goals should connect to larger transportation C H A P T E R 7

84 Transit and Micromobility strategies, plans, or processes in the region, such as comprehensive planning, bike and pedestrian master plans, and multimodal access plans. Checklist: Define Public Goals (See Table 4) Choose from among the common agency goals in Table 4 for micromobility partnerships, or add others. If applicable, list the strategy documents, plans, or authorities that provide the goals. Decision: Assess whether micromobility providers/non-agency operators are likely to inde- pendently achieve the agency’s identified goals or whether agency involvement is needed to make things happen. If the activity toward achieving those goals is already taking place, or you otherwise have reason to believe greater public involvement is unlikely to be needed at present, pause the process of pursuing a partnership for now and revisit if goals or conditions change. Otherwise, begin to inventory tools and resources at your disposal for pursuing a partnership: Inventory the tools and resources at your agency’s disposal, as well as what is outside of its control. Checklist: Internal Capacity and Staff Roles (See Table 5) Take stock of internal capacity to manage a collaboration and engage with partners; this process can also help identify areas where additional staffing or organizational changes may be needed Note: Boxes marked “checklist” refer to supporting checklists and explanations on the following pages of the toolkit. Figure 33. Decision tree: whether to pursue a partnership.

Partnership Toolkit 85   to move a partnership forward. Depending on the size of the agency and potential partner- ship, several of these functions may be combined in a single office or for a single staff member. Understand the scale and nature of available funding sources, including limitations on their application. Especially in markets where micromobility providers have not already arrived, some level of subsidy may be necessary, and for capital-intensive docked or hybrid systems, it almost certainly will be. Beyond government monies, sponsorship and advertising are common components of the micromobility funding picture. Checklist: Agency In-Kind Value (See Table 6) Beyond funding, understand what other value the agency can offer that is beneficial to private operators or their riders (especially if it is possible to offer/award it in a way that provides exclusive or preferential access to a smaller number of vendors). Some typical examples are to: • Think through the stations, parking lots, storage/maintenance facilities, and other agency assets that may be relevant to a project. Table 4. Checklist to define public goals. Goal Plan or Authority Increase the accessibility of the transportation system Equitably distribute mobility choices Reduce automobile dependency; create safer and easier travel for people outside of cars Improve local/regional mobility, reducing congestion Expand the area readily accessible by transit Fill transit service gaps/provide alternatives Relieve peak-hour crowding on transit vehicles Reduce car parking pressure near stations Reach new customers Expand service offerings for existing customers Reduce demand for personal bike/scooter storage/transport Organize micromobility parking near stations Add non-auto options for station access Other (list) Role Team Member/Department Project management Capital and infrastructure planning Operations planning Procurement and contracting Legal/legislative Data handling and analysis Labor relations Construction Marketing and communications Community outreach Other Table 5. Internal capacity and staff roles checklist.

86 Transit and Micromobility • Identify other stakeholders: existing mobility providers (especially incumbent bikeshare systems) and trip-planning, ticketing, and data aggregation vendors; community organi- zations and advocates; local institutions, key businesses, and potential sponsors; and the community itself. Checklist: Local Regulatory Environment (See Table 7) Outline the local regulatory environment for micromobility, including key departments responsible in the jurisdiction(s) where a program might operate. Decision: Based on this inventory of goals and resources, make the initial go/no-go decision of whether a micromobility partnership is both worthwhile (in terms of goals and potential benefits) and possible for your agency given its resources. 2. Engage Partners, Assess Needs, and Outline the Project • Once you get started, be flexible and ready to iterate the partnership’s specific form. – Approach potential partnerships not as singular events but as processes that will need to be regularly monitored and revisited. Build in opportunities to reflect on and refine the partnership. Map out possible phases for the gradual expansion of a successful program. Table 6. Agency in-kind value checklist. Value or Benefit to Operators Possible to Offer Preferential/Exclusive? Access to key locations on public way Access to key locations off public way (on agency property, parking lots, etc.) Dedicated parking at transit stops Trip planning/payment integration with agency app Marketing support/tie-ins Advertising locations on transit vehicles/stops Direct communications with potential customers Association with trusted local brand Other Table 7. Regulatory environment checklist. Public Responsibility Agency/Department Public way Streets Sidewalks Transit stations Parking lots/structures Utilities Vehicle permitting Business permitting Construction Signage/wayfinding Advertising/sponsorship Data sharing/aggregation Law or code enforcement Other

Partnership Toolkit 87   – Whether you intend to create a one-off pilot or embark on a path to a permanent program, lay out a flexible process that allows for a cycle of information gathering, experimentation, performance monitoring and evaluation, and refinement (or, if appropriate, ending) of the partnership approach. • Activate the internal team, starting with the project manager. Early on, create a succession plan in case the project manager changes roles or leaves the agency. • Identify and engage potential project champions within your organization and in the wider community. Contact local stakeholders, particularly local DOTs or other regulators, to alert them to the project development underway. • Define the project’s potential customer base and assess their needs: – If you’re focusing on a specific geography or community, perform a needs assessment that establishes existing levels of transportation access, walkability, and infrastructure and opportunities for improving access with micromobility. If the city or another entity is already ingesting micromobility usage data locally, this should be part of the picture. – Survey or meet with residents and community leaders to understand needs for reduced-fare options, non-smartphone access, cash or retail options for unbanked people, and translation of apps and program materials. • Based on this assessment, define the geographic or community focus of the project, including identifying disadvantaged or historically underserved communities within the bounds you determine. • Understand the outside operators’ business cases (including private, nonprofit, and other models) and potential roles in a partnership. – Micromobility is a low-margin business, and as with any other good or service, operators in the sector must remain solvent to continue providing a product that agencies and the public find valuable. Transit agency partnerships can be appealing due to their potential to reach new users and markets, secure predictable revenues through subsidy or other funding support, or bolster an operator’s reputation through association with a trusted local agency. But a project may have trouble attracting private partners if it creates excessive requirements, unnecessary regulatory burdens, or hurdles for participation (e.g., in insur- ance levels, fare integration, and data sharing) beyond what is already in existence in the local environment. – Equitable distribution of mobility choices and safer travel for people outside of cars should be core goals for all transportation programs. Beyond the service itself, cities and agencies should work together to provide supportive investments in safe infrastructure or link to other efforts like complete streets, mobility hubs, and so forth that can make micromobility (as well as general public biking and walking) safer and more equitable throughout the jurisdiction. Public agencies should be realistic about the ability of private startups (even those backed by considerable venture capital) to provide solutions for decades of neglect of communities and infrastructure. – Consider issuing a request for information (RFI) to better understand potential vendors’ product features, limitations, and business needs. The RFI could include a draft project scope and could ask respondents to reflect on its realism in light of their capacity and offer- ings. Requesting cost estimates will also help inform the level of funding the project may need to secure. 3. Set Project Parameters and Secure Partners • Based on the information gathered and relationships established in previous steps, set the parameters for the initial round of the partnership. – Define the specific services that the partnership should encompass as well as the geographic, regulatory, and other broad requirements within which it must operate.

88 Transit and Micromobility – Map out operating areas, zones of special focus (e.g., equity priority areas, station areas), and other physical assets that will be part of the project. Define other parameters, such as hours of availability, transit lines, or routes where service will be focused. – Outline customer service and equity requirements, such as response expectations, dis- count programs, and access for people without smartphones or credit cards, and related outreach. – Identify operational parameters that will be subject to performance-based incentives, such as fleet caps, service areas, or fees. – Establish a budget and secure funding commitments from the parties or entities identified previously. Also decide if a performance bond or other risk-protection mechanism will be required. – Create a data policy that balances user privacy with agency needs for monitoring and evaluation and that is, ideally, in alignment with the local DOT. Also include any required collaboration with a third-party vendor or data aggregator. As data sharing and collaboration between multiple vendors are often sticking points in negotiations and implementation, identify the essential components of the policy. • Establish the priority of the requirements identified previously—rank or score according to what is “must have” and what is “nice to have.” • Issue an RFP or other competitive call for partners (or respond to unsolicited proposals) with the specific requirements developed in the previous steps and the previously enunciated agency goals at the core. • Evaluate proposals based on the established priorities. • Negotiate the partnership agreement with one or more partners, folding them into the iterative process already underway through a flexible agreement that allows for the business relation- ship to be evaluated and revisited. – As part of the contract requirements, agree on the performance measures and data-sharing arrangement through which information will be provided to the agency and the frequency with which this will be evaluated. – Set the timeline for the partnership’s evaluation and decision on its renewal, expansion, or winding down. 4. Launch, Operate, and Monitor • Engage local stakeholders and project champions in preparation for launch. – Center the project’s public goals in outreach efforts and marketing materials. – Focus on reaching new users in their own communities and through trusted voices. Use the transit agency’s and the private partners’ communication and advertising channels to reach a broader audience. • Launch the partnership and begin to measure progress. – Check compliance with data-sharing agreements early in the performance period. – For programs that involve a public subsidy or other outlays for specific trips or locations, perform field checks to ensure that geofences, coupon codes, and so forth are working as agreed. • Begin to compile regular performance reports based on key performance indicators (KPIs) and report to the stakeholder group, both within and beyond the agency. 5. Evaluate, Refine, and Start Again • After enough time for the program to get on its feet (at least 3 to 6 months), begin to formally evaluate the partnership against its broader goals in addition to ongoing performance monitoring.

Partnership Toolkit 89   • Be prepared to adjust the parameters of the partnership or service midstream in response to changing KPIs and findings of the program evaluation or as unforeseen challenges or needs arise. • Continue to provide stakeholders with regular performance reporting and periodic reports on the progress of the evaluation. • After a set duration or budget expenditure, make the decision on whether to continue the partnership in its current form, expand it (e.g., to more partners, more stations, or a larger area), reduce it, or start to wind it down. – As part of this decision, think about the path for a project’s transition from a pilot to a more permanent service offering by the agency and how this would change the shape of the partnership in the next iteration. • Regardless of the decision on continuing the project, make the data and operational lessons created during each phase of the partnership as public as possible. This will both inform future service planning within your agency’s service area and provide other agencies with more knowledge on how to build better partnerships for themselves. Key Case Studies and Pilot Examples The following case studies or example pilots, with information relevant to conceptualizing or forming partnerships, are described in the main text. They are summarized here for quick reference by readers seeking models for specific policy goals or challenges. This section also contains links to key documents relating to the case studies. Implications for Transit Agencies Transit Agency Funding for Micromobility • Dayton RTA, KCATA, LA Metro, the COMET (SC): Public funds used to support micro- mobility for transit rider connections (details in Chapter 5). Private Infrastructure Funding • Portland, OR: Micromobility fees support program administration and enforcement, safe travel infrastructure, dedicated parking, and equitable access. – Administrative rule: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/citycode/article/690212. • Phoenix and San Francisco: Company-funded scooter docking/charging stations near transit. Expanding Micromobility to People with Disabilities • Seattle: Nonprofit partnership to provide adaptive cycles. • Oakland: Scooter permit program requires all operators to provide adaptive scooters and accessible apps. – Permit terms: https://bit.ly/3l8KbWX. Agency–Micromobility Partnership Approaches Transit Agency–Led Operation or Integration of Services • Dayton RTA: Direct agency operation and maintenance of bikeshare and scooter services, with vehicles supplied by vendor; cooperation with chosen data aggregator required by municipal administrative rules and regulations. – Scooter service agreement: https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Spin-Agreement.pdf. – City administrative rules: https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Electric-Transportation- Device-Rules-and-Regs-2.pdf.

90 Transit and Micromobility • KCATA (Kansas City): Close collaboration with nonprofit operator for agency-branded bike and scooter operations. – Sponsorship agreement: https://bit.ly/3bxy3vn. • The COMET (Columbia, SC): Agency-subsidized bikeshare stations, free rides for bus users. Uses FTA 5307 “associated transit improvements” funds to finance system expansion and transit connections. • Metro Bikeshare (LA): Agency-branded bikeshare with third-party vendor and separate equip- ment supplier. – Board report and resolution: https://boardagendas.metro.net/board-report/2015-1107/. • Capital Metro (Austin): Inter-local agreement with city to co-invest and co-manage local bikeshare program, which is branded as an extension of the transit agency. – Inter-local agreement (p. 67): https://bit.ly/3v5ARrD. Subsidizing Specific Ride Types or Creating Connections • SacRT (Sacramento, CA): Free light-rail trips for same-day dockless bikeshare users; e-bike charging hubs deployed at stations. – Offer details: https://www.sacrt.com/apps/sacrt-to-offer-free-rides-on-light-rail-to-jump- bike-users/. • SMART (Sonoma and Marin Counties, CA): Hybrid e-bikes deployed at rail stations and key locations in rail corridor. City–Transit Agency Policy Collaboration • Denver RTD/City and County of Denver: Interagency collaboration on micromobility parking program to promote vehicle placement and rebalancing to stops throughout city and regional transit service area. City permit program harmonized with RTD license program and designated micromobility parking at agency-owned locations; also intended to limit inter- ference with pedestrians. – City permit requirements: https://bit.ly/2PGwN0u. – RTD dockless guidelines: https://bit.ly/3bv8k6Y. Mobility Hubs and Modal Integration • Metro Transit (Twin Cities, MN): Transit agency collaboration with city, county, mobility providers, and neighborhood organizations to pilot mobility hubs for multimodal connections and placemaking. • LADOT and LA Metro: At key rail stations, a system of multimodal hubs, including bikeshare, microtransit, and coordination with other shared mobility and mobility-on-demand services. Includes payment integration and connections to other community institutions and social services. – Integrated Mobility Hubs RFP: https://www.citymart.com/bids/lamobilityhubs. • Move 412/Pittsburgh Mobility Collaborative: Consortium-based approach to providing a multimodal suite of mobility options, including shared bikes and scooters, mobility hubs with charging, carshare, carpooling, and apps to facilitate unified payment and information. – Program information: https://www.move412.com/what-is-move-pgh. – Selected proposal: https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/files/pittsburgh_rfp.pdf.