This is delicious!
On Monday, a Board of Supervisors committee delved into the process by which the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency selected two startups, Scoot Networks and Skip, to offer app-based rentals of electric scooters in the city. Scoot and Skip are expected to start rentals on Oct. 15 under a year-long permit program.
Lime, one of 12 contenders for the e-scooter pilot program, appealed that decision last month, saying the MTA exhibited “unlawful bias.”
That was the opening shot. And it punctured a can of worms.
Safai asked why the city ended up with only two scooter operators although the MTA board authorized up to five permits.
Boldfaced emphasis added by me.
And the fix was apparently in:
“The process the MTA followed was flawed and clearly biased,” [Scott Kubly, chief program officer for Lime] said. His examples: It rated Lime as “poor” under experience, even though the company operates 22,000 e-scooters in 100 cities worldwide, while companies that have not operated scooters were rated “strong,” he said. Although Lime’s proposed service area would cover the entire city, it receive a “poor” rating while companies that proposed more limited areas were rated “strong,” he said.
Hey, how much graft was passed under the table?
And we have a new player:
Jon Givner, deputy city attorney, said the supervisors don’t have authority over the MTA permitting processes, only the power to ask about them.
“Permitting programs like this are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the MTA,” he told the committee.
How far and how deep does the corruption run? It’s obvious to any idiot that something stinks!