LETTER: Archaic process hinders transparency at city hall

I have been following the Hamilton bike share follies since this time last year, when city council earmarked $1.6 million of Metrolinx “Quick Wins” funding to pay for the capitals cost of bikes and racks.
(The non-profit running the bike share is to pay its operating expenses through bike rental and sponsorship income.)
I have written many letters and made extensive inquiries with the non-profit formed to run and administer this 750 bike, 105 station bike-share.
They have not been very forthcoming with the information I have requested.
I decided to make a Freedom of Information request to find out more. The process required me to download and fill out a paper form, write a cheque to the city for $5, put a stamp on an envelope and mail it all to city hall.
Much time and effort could be saved if this Freedom of Information transaction could have taken place online, like the other electronic services available to residents, like dog tags.

Mark-Alan Whittle
Hamilton Mountain

View article...

LETTER: Bike share system secretive on numbers

Re: Bike share program limping along (Aug. 7)

Over the last number of months I have been contacting other Social Bicycles bike-share programs that are up and running, as opposed to being in the planning stages.
They are all small systems at airports and expansive campuses. None are operating in a city as large as Hamilton.
To date, SoBi Hamilton has refused to reveal how many memberships have been sold, but we know from city staff estimates that 4,500 yearly memberships need to be sold and 15,000 casual members paying $5 per hour to rent these bicycles will also be needed to float a non-profit 750-bike system. This might explain their secrecy and anemic bike station installation pace.
Just under two weeks until September, their revised proposed launch date for the system. One would have to believe in miracles and the tooth fairy to think this will actually happen.

Mark-Alan Whittle
Hamilton Mountain

 

View more here

LETTER: City should have spent bike cash on the HSR

In March I wrote about my concerns about Social Bicycle and their 750 bike, 105 bike-rack system proposed for downtown Hamilton.
Fast forward to today and you will see that not a single SoBi bicycle has been deployed — and won’t be until at least September.
City hall originally proclaimed the system would be rolled out in spring of this year.
Over the last few weeks I have been posing questions to the limited number of SoBi bike-share rental systems in the United Stated in order to gauge the viability of this “new” bike-share system and technology.
Most of the systems that are actually up and running, and not in the planning stages, are small pilot projects, some having only 25 bikes.
SoBi Hamilton apparently has a costed-out business plan, but it has never been made public.
City staff have done some estimations and found that a 750 bike system would need at least 4,500 annual members and about 15,000 casual users to make the system viable.
When I asked SoBi Hamilton how many memberships they have sold in Hamilton to date, they refused to say. One can only assume their membership sales have not met the target set in their secret business plan.
Who would run a bike rental business this way?
The $1.6 million invested could have been used to improve our HSR, instead of giving them competition. A bus ride is cheaper than renting a bike.

Mark-Alan Whittle
Hamilton Mountain

View article

LETTER: City’s bike share plan seems to be on shaky path

Late last December, Hamilton council approved a non-profit bike share to be run by Social Bicycles and a non-profit board of directors.
To date, Social Bicycles’ business plan has not been made public, but it should.
Social Bicycles is a relatively new startup and this is their first foray into Canada, with 750 bikes and 80 stations destined for Hamilton.
The presentation to council confirmed that $1.6 million in Metrolinx Quick Wins funding was used to buy all the equipment and Social Bicycle would be taking care of everything else — all liability, insurance, operating cash, wages, etc., they say will come from membership sales, user fees, sponsorships and advertising revenue.
After exchanging emails with an executive of the company, I get the feeling they are flying by the seat of their pants based on demographic information that does not fit the profile of those citizens downtown who would be able to afford a membership and pay the fees of five or six dollars per hour after the first free hour.
More telling is the area defined for the bike-share — all downtown and a little of Dundas.
Nothing above the escarpment, despite Mohawk College and hospitals galore.
My fear is that Hamilton will have another non-profit that will be coming to council for a handout when their venture fails to meet membership and revenue generation projections.

Mark-Alan Whittle
Hamilton Mountain

View article.