San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)
DID SAN DIEGO MAKE THE RIGHT CALL CLAMPING DOWN ON E-SCOOTER COMPANIES?
YES
There were some safety concerns about people using the scooters on sidewalks, which led to the requirements for technology restricting their speed when on sidewalks. That hurt because that made them more susceptible to theft, especially given our proximity to the border. But the loss of the scooter companies has been mitigated by the creation of the personal e-scooters market, which could fill the need for the “last mile” of transportation that could improve the viability of public transit.
NO
The region has aggressive goals to reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. One of the most important strategies for reducing emissions is providing micro-mobility options, such as scooters and bikes. It gives people traveling short distances a true last-mile transportation alternative to reach their destination or to connect to the current transit system. It is unfortunate that a compromise could not be met to keep e-scooters as a viable option.
NO
I don’t think the intent was the total elimination of scooters. The fact that owners of scooters have carte blanche, but others (including visitors) have been regulated away is economically biased. The goal should be to achieve reasonable rules to live by, because multi-modal transportation solutions are the right answer in urban areas where short trips dominate. The key is proper infrastructure, rules and the use of monitoring and regulating technology.
YES
The mismatch of conveyance speeds lead to a collision hazard. This is true on roads for cars vs. others. It is also true on sidewalks for pedestrians vs. zippy escooters. Hence, the speed limit was set at the typical walking speed of 3 mph. This regulation scuttled the e-scooter rental market. The burgeoning market of private e-scooters without automatic speed limiting will refresh concerns for pedestrian safety.
NO
This goes to show what an overly strong regulatory hand can do to an emerging market. There are plenty of folks who could probably benefit from getting around faster with a scooter, especially after they ride the bus or transit to finish that last mile. But now the poor choices by our public leaders means you have to buy one and won’t have the ability to rent something from competing companies.
YES
Electric scooters are polarizing. Users see e-scooters as convenient, eco-friendly means of short-distance transportation. Detractors say they are irresponsibly littered across popular areas and operated dangerously. Rental scooters are generally used without helmets and cause numerous injuries. The city was right to create restrictions to ensure safe operation. However, given the benefits, restrictions should aspire to improve public safety, not make the businesses untenable. Speed caps on walkways and parking spaces were a good foundation.
NO
Scooters are convenient for getting around the city, but unsafe riders or people who leave them anywhere make them a nuisance. We should require a driver’s license and have scooters use bike lanes. If we make the Gaslamp District a pedestrian-only area and negotiate a reasonable set of rules for scooter users, life will be better for scooter companies, users, and those navigating them in public. Too many regulations are an existential threat to scooters.
YES
Unfortunately, we saw devastating traumatic injuries and even deaths from the use of e-scooters due to high speed and lack of required safety equipment such as helmets. Restrictions were needed to save lives and limbs. If personal e-scooters take off in the same way that the others did, they should be regulated as well in the vehicle and /or municipal codes just as we do for motorcycles, bicycles and e-bicycles.