Pilot Project Bike Valet to Close Over Winter
The project operated from June to November will return in 2023
The City of Victoria has brought to light the closure of the bike valet pilot program that began on 26 June. At the time it was conceived, the plan was to close the program over the winter months, but since the announcement one councillor-elect and several citizens have voiced concerns over the closing.
Matt Dell was the first official to respond to the news after it was brought to Twitter by a local resident. He explained that he was disappointed that the program was closing for the winter and mentioned that Victoria does have winter cyclists that could benefit from having the facility over those months.
The city is running a survey as part of Engage.Victoria which can be found here. Residents are encouraged to provide information regarding the use of the facility and their opinion on the project moving forward.
Not everyone is bemoaning the closing of the program however. City Council candidate in the previous election Gary Beyer took to Twitter to explain that no service in the city is “free” which drew our replies from cycling enthusiasts throughout the city (and elsewhere, of course).
From what I have seen, no other councillor-elect has made a public statement on the closure but given the platforms of the five progressives and the mayor, there is little doubt there is discussion happening behind the scenes to extend the program. The program over the summer is being considered a success by those who have used the service. There seems to be little question over whether or not we will continue to have a much-needed bike valet program downtown, but there is significant concern over cost and who should pay.
We are just getting this newsletter off of the ground and need as much support as we can get. Please consider subscribing to the newsletter to show your support and get regular updates as they are posted directly to your email inbox.
This issue raises an important point about user-pay services offered by the government. While most services provided are covered through permit fees and charges, there are many government services that are paid with through general tax revenue. The implied rule of thumb for user-pay services are those that are used by a specific person or organization and not for the benefit of the greater community. This is why you pay directly for a building permit, but not to have the pothole filled at the end of your street. One is a benefit to just you, the other for the broader community (including you, of course).
Public transit also provides a benefit to society in the form of users removing vehicles off of the road which helps the environment and other roadway users. However, the bus is not paid for through general tax revenue— it is subsidized to be sure and many vulnerable groups get support— but each bus user pays to use the bus.
The argument from those that want the service to remain fee free is that the bike valet encourages cycling in the city because it provides a secure shelter from the elements and crime for bike commuters. They say that the service should be paid from the general tax revenue of the city because cycling has environmental and transportation benefits that all of society is better off having in place. This seems like a strong argument until we consider public transit.
Public transit also provides a benefit to society in the form of users removing vehicles off of the road which helps the environment and other roadway users. However, the bus is not paid for through general tax revenue— it is subsidized to be sure and many vulnerable groups get support— but each bus user pays to use the bus. And this system works for the most part. Which is why it is not entirely out to lunch to suggest that bike valet users pay to use the bike valet service.
While there is an argument that can be made that cycling provides a general benefit to society, there is also an individual service being provided to people with the bike valet program itself. I do not think the same argument about constructing and maintaining bike lanes can be applied to a valet service. It would kind of be like saying that parking garages should be fee free like roadways— they are not the same.
I do also think there is an argument to be made that the bike valet, while serving a great many cycling commuters, really only serves those working downtown. It is not actually a program that serves the broader city. While the plan down the road might include more, this present iteration is not the case.
I really do think there is a role for private enterprise or even a non-profit in providing this service for a modest fee.
At any rate, the city would like to know how you feel so be sure to fill out the survey which can be found here.
