SF’s scooter conflict: City attorney issues cease-and-desist orders to companies

Bird scooters are parked on a Market Street sidewalk. The scooters rent by a phone app and often are parked anywhere. Bird scooters are parked on a Market Street sidewalk. The scooters rent by a phone app and often are parked anywhere. Photo: Michael Macor / The Chronicle Buy photo Photo: Michael Macor / The Chronicle Image 1 of / 13 Caption Close SF’s scooter conflict: City attorney issues cease-and-desist orders to companies 1 / 13 Back to Gallery

San Francisco’s battle with companies that rent electric scooters kicked into high gear Monday as City Attorney Dennis Herrera issued cease-and-desist orders to the businesses even as the Board of Supervisors was considering a proposal to regulate the divisive transportation devices.

The board’s Transportation and Land Use Committee unanimously endorsed the proposed ordinance, sending it to the Board of Supervisors, which will take it up Tuesday.

Before the committee’s action, Herrera sent letters Monday to Bird, LimeBike and Spin, the companies running the scooter operations, ordering them to stop doing business until they take stronger efforts to keep users from riding them on sidewalks, parking them so they block sidewalks, ramps and transits stops and using them without helmets or drivers licenses.

All of those are violations of either city or state law, but in the three weeks since the scooters hit the streets and sidewalks of San Francisco, they’ve become common offenses — and complaints.

The nearly identical letters accuse the companies of “continu(ing) to operate an unpermitted motorized scooter rental program in the City and County of San Francisco, creating a public nuisance on the city’s streets and sidewalks and endangering public health and safety.”

Each company, the letters say, “must immediately cease and desist from unlawful conduct.”

It is unclear what will happen if the companies continue to operate as usual.

“For now, the letter speaks for itself,” said John Coté, a city attorney spokesman.

Kenneth Baer, a spokesman for Bird, said that starting Tuesday, the company will begin a test program in which it asks each user to take a photo of where a scooter is parked at the end of a ride.

“This will help Bird take action to ensure frequent violators of Bird’s parking rules are suspended or deactivated,” he said, referring to company rules provided to riders.

Rachel Starr, a spokeswoman for Spin, said the company has been talking with the Metropolitan Transportation Agency since February and supports Supervisor Aaron Peskin’s legislation.

“We are working to ensure that we comply with any of the outlined recommendations we don’t already have in place,” she said in a statement. “As the only San Francisco-based company offering scooter share, it’s extremely important to us to continue working with the SFMTA, Board of Supervisors and community interest groups ... to ensure that we’re addressing public concerns.”

The city attorney’s letters, accompanied by photographs, accuse the companies of creating a public nuisance.

The companies could address the issues Herrera outlined in his letters with more prominent postings of riding and parking requirements on the scooters themselves as well as on the apps used to rent the devices, the city attorney said.

Herrera, in his letter, gives the companies a deadline of April 30 to provide his office with a detailed written report on how they have complied. Coté, his spokesman, said Herrera hadn’t decided what action he would take if a company fails to file a satisfactory response.

“Our office has never been shy about enforcing rules,” Coté said.

The letters were sent to the three companies just as the board’s Land Use and Transportation Committee was starting a meeting to consider regulating the scooters.

The ordinance by Peskin, introduced on March 6 in anticipation the scooters could come to town after they’d appeared in other cities, would also give the Public Works department permission to remove unauthorized scooters from streets or sidewalks.

The committee forwarded the ordinance to the full board after listening to dozens of speakers for and against the scooters, and grilling representatives from the scooter companies. If the plan is approved, the MTA could impose a permitting process, and regulations, by early May.

Coté said the cease-and-desist order is designed to complement the permitting process by working to enforce existing laws while provisions of the ordinance are put in place.

Peskin said companies thinking about providing new transportation choices in San Francisco should be more cooperative with the city.

“It would be very nice if the tech bros could come in and ask for permission instead of asking for forgiveness,” he said.

City ordinances don’t mention motorized scooters, so the city has been unable to regulate them. However, Public Works crews did seize 66 scooters Friday under city codes that allow them to clear obstructions from sidewalks.

Workers took pictures of each of the 66 bikes before lifting them from the sidewalks and placing them on city trucks. They were hauled to an undisclosed location, where their owners were able to reclaim them.

Bird, LimeBike and Spin will be fined a minimum of $125 per scooter unless they can abate the problem within 30 days or prevail in an appeal hearing. Officials with each firm have vowed to work with the city.

In addition to establishing a permitting process, Peskin’s proposal would amend the Public Works code to consider scooters without permits a public nuisance subject to the same laws as debris dumped on sidewalks.

Paul Rose, an MTA spokesman, said details are still being worked out but that, at a minimum, the scooter-rental companies would be required to educate their users about where, and how, the devices should be used and parked.

“We want to make sure the scooters are being operated safely, being parked in appropriate locations and that we’re able to hold the companies accountable,” Rose said.

The electric-powered standup scooters were deposited, without notice or publicity, on sidewalks around the city about three weeks ago. They quickly became a divisive topic, with users heralding them as a new transportation tool great for short trips without a car, and critics complaining that they’re often parked in ways that block sidewalks and building entrances.

Michael Cabanatuan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mcabanatuan@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @ctuan