Microtransit

“Microtransit” may be coming to Beverly Hills. What is Microtransit, you may ask? Well, according to mobility firm SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) International:

“Microtransit is a privately or publicly operated, technology-enabled transit service that typically uses multi-passenger/pooled shuttles or vans to provide on-demand or fixed-schedule services with either dynamic or fixed routing.”

For Beverly Hills, “microtransit” as defined in a November 15, 2024 Request for Proposals (RFP) is “a flexible transit service for an 18-month pilot program in the form of mobility on-demand or microtransit services for general public use within the City of Beverly Hills and identified destinations.”

At a practical level this means that the City is at long last getting serious about providing a means of transportation for Beverly Hills residents to and from the Metro subway stations that are scheduled to open at Wilshire and LaCienega at the end of 2025 and at Wilshire and Beverly/Rodeo the end of 2026.

These long delayed stations and subway service (originally scheduled to commence in 2023) are provided by Metro. Metro, however, does not provide security or parking outside of stations or bathrooms in its stations or on its trains. I understand that the BHPD has long been engaged in planning for security. However, until now, even though we have known for years that the subway was coming to our City, nothing has been done to address the needs of residents to travel from their homes to and from the subway. This is the so-called but imprecise “first mile/last mile.” And now, help may be on its way.

Let’s look at the RFP. It is a 30 page document so I will summarize it and also provide information that I received from an interview with Shana Epstein, the Director of the City’s Public Works Department.

The RFP is a request that potential vendors make proposals to provide the services necessary to meet defined specifications.

An introductory paragraph explains what the City is looking for as follows:

“The City of Beverly Hills’ (City) Public Works Department Transportation Bureau invites qualified transportation contractors (Contractor) to respond to a Request for Proposals (RFP) for microtransit turnkey services for the City. The City is looking for a Contractor that can develop and implement a flexible transit service for an 18-month pilot program (Program) in the form of mobility on-demand or microtransit services for general public use within the City of Beverly Hills and identified destinations. The City seeks a turnkey/ all-in-one service to include the necessary technology, labor, and vehicles for complete operations management.”

It specifies that the vehicles to be provided be zero-emission and accommodate 8-10 passengers using autonomous technology (driverless) if practical. In the short run, it is my belief that these will prove cost-prohibitive. Passengers should be able to request rides through use of an app or website or phone. Given the lack of density in some neighborhoods, the City will likely be somewhat flexible about the use of smaller vehicles.

While detailed, the RFP does not address certain important issues such as whether services will be limited to Beverly Hills residents or include people who work in the City or available to the general public. It also does not address whether the service will be free or require a nominal payment. Ms. Epstein’s tentative view is that the service may start as a free service until it becomes established. Presumably, the cost to the user will be less than what is charged by Uber or Lyft. Whether the service will be door to door for every passenger is also unclear but the RFP implies that some passengers will have to walk short distances to pick up or drop off points.

Responses to the RFP are now due in mid-January. Ms. Epstein told me that there is a substantial level of interest among potential bidders. She estimated that approximately eight are “serious.”

After the City has closed the bidding process, the prospects will be vetted, questions will be resolved and then the Department of Public Works will recommend a specific bidder and the relevant terms and conditions to the City Council. Ms. Epstein said that it is her objective to be able to commence service by late summer 2025 so as to have things running smoothly by the time that Metro subway service to La Cienega station commences.

A major issue of course is cost and that is an open question for now. Assuming that is resolved, my view is that some form of Beverly Hills Microtransit that at least serves the subway stops will happen.

My opinion is based on the following. Ordinarily, before an RFP for transportation services is issued, there will have been discussion of the specifics by the Traffic & Parking Commission (TPC), which would be closely controlled of course by the Department of Public Works, Then it would be discussed at least by a City Council Liaison Committee or a City Council Study Session. This would be followed by some direction to Public Works. As far as I can tell, there has been no public direction from the City Council and an on demand service has not been discussed by the TPC (perhaps beyond a brief mention several years ago entirely unrelated to this RFP). And Public Works did not “go rogue” and prepare this RFP on its own.

Given the rapidly approaching need for “first mile/last mile” service to La Cienega Station, perhaps it was concluded that there simply was no time for any public discussion. And, as I have regularly pointed out, neither Public Works staff nor the City Council seem to have any real interest in independent advice from our Commissions. The only explanation that I have received about the genesis of this RFP is that “We [Public Works] were instructed by City Council to just look at the microtransit like collective Uber instead of a shuttle.” I could find no record of this vague instruction that, in any event, is not license to prepare a detailed RFP without any review by TPC or City Council. My best guess is that Public Works was instructed by someone, the Office of the City Manager is most likely, to bypass any public process and prepare and transmit to potential contractors the RFP.

Thus, it will happen absent unanticipated cost or other obstacles. I do have some suggestions in the absence of any opportunity for public input.

First, at present there is likely little demand for this service. Rather, it is my hope and aspiration that the availability of the service will drive the demand not demand driving provision of the service. As there may be little demand at the outset, it is advisable that the amounts paid to the contractor be tied to usage rather than a fixed monthly charge. The greater the usage, the greater the charges. Notably, the most important factor driving demand will be the perception and reality that it is safe to ride Metro’s subways. This is out of our control. At a bare minimum, Metro should ensure that only persons who have paid the fare are allowed to access or exit the subways.

Second, the timing of the pilot program should extend through the initial operation of not only the Wilshire/La Cienega but also the opening of the Reeves/Beverly/Rodeo station. And at this point, we really don’t know whether the current estimated opening dates are realistic. The pilot program should commence a few months before a realistic date for opening of the La Cienega station and extend through a few months after the opening of the Reeves/Beverly/Rodeo station.

To be clear, I have no objection to the substance and transmission of the RFP and am inclined to think that this microtransit system is, if cost effective, a good idea. However, I am constrained to observe that this type of opaque activity falls short of the type of transparency that we deserve and should require from our City leaders.

⸻

Jerry Felsenthal Passes

Last week, our City lost Jerry Felsenthal, a uniquely thoughtful leader whose many talents were matched by his grace and kindness. He spent six years as a member and chair of the Public Works Commission where he was frustrated because, in his words, he was unable to “add a single drop of water” to what he considered inadequate water storage capacity. Similarly, he focused his extraordinary knowledge of real estate development on attempting to use more productively the City’s real estate portfolio. He felt that these efforts were stymied by, what I can most benignly characterize as, the City’s bureaucracy.

One of Jerry’s most important legacies was to persuade his very talented daughter-in-law, Erica Felsenthal, to become involved in our City government. I am confident that Erica will carry on with a spirit of which Jerry would have been immensely proud.