City bans e-scooter riding downtown core due to protest concerns

(Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Closure boundary. (Source: City of Portland)

The City of Portland has prohibited parking or riding of its fleet of shared electric scooters in the downtown core due to concerns over protests that could follow tonight’s election results.

The Portland Bureau of Transportation, who oversees about 2,000 e-scooters from Lyft (under the Biketown moniker) and Lime, issued a statement this morning saying the prohibition went into effect at 4:00 am this morning. “As we approach the upcoming election, we understand there are questions and concerns about the potential for vandalism or violence involving e-scooter devices,” PBOT wrote. “Thus, based on direction from the Portland Police Bureau and Portland Fire & Rescue, PBOT is implementing riding and parking restrictions.”

The boundaries of the no-ride zone are SW Harvey Milk, SW First, SW Clay and SW Broadway. Access to the Hawthorne and Morrison bridges via Naito Parkway is not impacted by this policy.

The move comes after weeks of preparation by local law enforcement and first responder agencies to stay ahead of any unrest that might happen later tonight and in the coming days. Police and fire officials likely encouraged this move because of a history of scooter throwing during the 2020 protests. During one stage of the protests in May of that year, the city announced a similar e-scooter prohibition.

Reactions to the decision have wondered why the most dangerous form of transportation — cars — aren’t facing any restrictions. During the racial justice and police accountability protests in Portland that took place between 2020 and 2021, there were several incidents involving assault of protestors with a car or truck. There was even a car and truck-based “cruise rally” where at least one person on a bicycle was assaulted by a driver. In June 2020, a Portland Police officer drove their patrol SUV into a crowd of people on the street.

While it’s a tempting comparison to wonder about cars and their drivers — keep in mind what PBOT is doing is shutting down a public system, and only one part of it at that. Biketown’s bike share system, and riding personal bikes and scooters, are still allowed downtown. That being said, why single out e-scooters for a potential for vandalism or violence? It seems odd and unnecessary.

This also makes me wonder if Lime and Lyft (Biketown’s operator) forced the city’s hand because they wanted to protect their investment. But if that’s the case, why are bikes not part of the ban? And if the city was truly concerned with vandalism and violence from vehicles, they’d make the entire downtown core vehicle-free. Then again, government tends to do what it can with what it has. And they can easily flip a switch and turn off the e-scooter system. So they did.

PBOT hasn’t stated when the downtown e-scooter riding prohibition will be lifted, but says they’ll stay in touch with police and fire officials, “As public order proceeds following the election.” “Our goal is to return to normal, uninterrupted service as quickly as possible.” Learn more at the city’s website.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Founder of BikePortland (in 2005). Father of three. North Portlander. Basketball lover. Car driver. If you have questions or feedback about this site or my work, contact me via email at maus.jonathan@gmail.com, or phone/text at 503-706-8804. Also, if you read and appreciate this site, please become a paying subscriber.

Thanks for reading.

BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.

Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

36 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jake9
Jake9
1 month ago

It’s unclear where the “questions and concerns about potential for vandalism or violence” came from

People with a knowledge of history? People who remember the last time Trump won (if he wins again)?

That being said, why single out e-scooters for a potential for vandalism or violence? It seems odd and unnecessary.

Because they are easily thrown or used as cudgels? Because they actually fall under the jurisdiction of PBOT?

Again, fingers crossed people can act like adults and accept what happens. Hope for the best politically, but if the worst happens then breaking windows and destroying things does not actually send a positive message.

Jeff Rockshoxworthy
Jeff Rockshoxworthy
1 month ago
Reply to  Jake9

Let us recall The Narcissist’s Prayer:

That didn’t happen.
And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.
And if it was, that’s not a big deal.
And if it is, that’s not my fault.
And if it was, I didn’t mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.

It’s what I think of every time a politician, activist, or blogger tries to downplay what happened here in 2020.

Steve
Steve
1 month ago

Does seem a bit extreme but I wonder how many eScooters went thru business windows during the last riots?

Lazy Spinner
Lazy Spinner
1 month ago

Strange, but those scooters can be easily used as sledgehammers on store windows and doors. Portlanders seem to like taking out their aggressions on and with those scooters.

dw
dw
1 month ago

Someone on Reddit postulated that it’s because scooters are “light enough to throw but heavy enough to do some damage.” I think your assessment that Lime/Lyft are trying to protect their investment is probably partially correct as well. It is a little corny, but I guess the city is trying to control what they can?

Here’s to hoping that folks don’t go out and tear up the town this week.

PS
PS
1 month ago

Is the confusion about this real or feigned?

Could it possibly be due to this?
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2022/03/man-sentenced-for-smashing-electric-scooter-against-window-of-federal-courthouse-in-downtown-portland.html

or this:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/portland-becomes-first-city-to-declare-protest-over-george-floyds-death-a-riot/ Emphasis on “When officers arrived, protesters used electric scooters to smash out the windows of police cars, the bureau says.”

The scooters are just obviously easier to use to cause damage and you don’t need to put in an ID like a bike. I am willing to guess, if someone unlocks a bike, and that bike ends up in a cop car, they could be penalties (lol, yeah right), and it also seems plausible that people with their own scooter aren’t going to throw it through a window.

Marat
Marat
1 month ago

they’re lying. It’s not violence against human bodies that they are concerned with — as you keenly observed, demonstrated by cars being allowed — but property damage. Property in downtown is more important that human lives. We know this because they keep reminding us of this — remember Mingus removing the bike lanes?

SolarEclipse
SolarEclipse
1 month ago
Reply to  Marat

And why do you feel compelled to destroy property that isn’t yours?
You obviously don’t care about others and what they’ve worked for.

qqq
qqq
1 month ago
Reply to  SolarEclipse

Believing City bureaus are more concerned with property damage than violence against humans is not the same as being “compelled to destroy property that isn’t yours”.

Yut
Yut
1 month ago
Reply to  SolarEclipse

I don’t see anything in the comment that you responded to that in favor of property damage.

Angus Peters
Angus Peters
1 month ago
Reply to  Marat

So it’s just fine to destroy other’s property? Are going to invite Antifa to your place tonight and hand out sledgehammers?

qqq
qqq
1 month ago
Reply to  Angus Peters

Believing City bureaus are more concerned with property damage than violence against humans is not the same as condoning destroying others’ property.

Mary S
Mary S
1 month ago
Reply to  qqq

What is your evidence that City employees are more concerned with property damage than violence agains humans? I have seen nothing to support that contention.

qqq
qqq
1 month ago
Reply to  Mary S

I never said that.

R
R
1 month ago
Reply to  Marat

Makes sense after observing the disparate treatment that Sunday Parkways get vs. the Torchlight Parade. On one occasion city leaders remembers how to use gravel filled dump trucks as barricades to supplement a police presence while other time a few cones with no dedicated police presence is good enough.

I do wonder what the regulatory basis for targeted scooter geo fences is. Hopefully someone will be filing disclosure requests for the related communications by city officials later in the week.

Kyle Banerjee
1 month ago

It does seem strange, but people look for excuses to act like imbeciles.

In all fairness, this is not a uniquely Portland phenomenon. Some towns only need be involved in a winning or losing NBA or NFL contest to descend into mayhem.

Aaron K
Aaron K
1 month ago

This is so disappointing.

First of all people live, work, and play downtown. We are trying to encourage that, and scooter share is an important part of that revitalization. Suddenly removing a travel mode people rely on reenforces the perception that the City and PBOT don’t see bike and scooter share as real everyday transportation, just optional accessories. Even worse, when they tragically reveal that they see non-car transportation options as a threat to public safety.

Even if our intent was to travel downtown to participate in a protest or demonstration, that is the time especially that the City should be supporting our democracy by enabling all kinds of people to use all kinds of travel modes to participate.

If I was headed to a mass protest or demonstration, I would especially not want to bring my personal bike, as bikes are cumbersome in crowds, and locking up could mean you lose access to your bike as the police cordon off areas at random. Our surface-level light rail is often delayed during marches or demonstrations and becomes even less reliable. Driving is just as impractical as it always is downtown.

You quickly see that bike and scooter share would be the best way to travel to centralized in-person political activity, and this amounts to a suppression of our constitutional rights, our First Amendment right to assembly and free speech. As an American, I do consider the First Amendment to be foundational to democracy.

This is a classic and disturbing abuse of power, and helps me understand the need for additional operators of transportation options that are not subject to our currently misguided unconstitutional centralized authority.

I’m so happy we will have new leadership in Portland.

SolarEclipse
SolarEclipse
1 month ago
Reply to  Aaron K

I think I have an Abrams tank tucked away in one of my garages some place. I’m sure you won’t mind if I bring that downtown. It’s all about freedom, right? I heard that from you so that must make it ok for me too.

Angus Peters
Angus Peters
1 month ago
Reply to  Aaron K

Ah yes, heaven forbid we remove the scooters! After all, nothing says “stable democracy” quite like an army of “peaceful” protestors rolling in on rented wheels. Apparently, taking them away now is some huge offense against free speech. Because really, what’s a First Amendment right without the freedom to zip into a demonstration at 15 mph and then hurl them through storefront windows.

Angus Peters
Angus Peters
1 month ago

Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for the message. I completely agree that respectful dialogue is essential, and I appreciate that you want to keep things civil here.

I did want to share an observation, though: I’ve noticed that some comments from left-leaning voices – occasionally even those with sharp or personal critiques – seem to get through without similar warnings. I’m careful to keep my tone moderate and focused on the issues, so it’s a bit disheartening to feel that only certain perspectives are under the microscope.

I think a consistent approach to moderation, where everyone’s held to the same standard, could help make discussions even stronger and more inclusive here. Thanks for considering, and I appreciate the work you put into fostering this space.

John V
John V
1 month ago
Reply to  Aaron K

This is why we need a universal basic Brompton.

Angus Peters
Angus Peters
1 month ago

“It’s unclear where the “questions and concerns about potential for vandalism or violence” came from…”

Come on Jonathan. Thrown scooters can do a lot of damage: to police and fire vehicles , officers themselves, parked cars and storefront windows. Let’s support efforts to rein in the violence not question reasonable efforts to stop it.

Mark smith
Mark smith
1 month ago

Are you really surprised the government removed your ability to travel on a whim?

Chris I
Chris I
1 month ago
Reply to  Mark smith

You sound like the people who get upset about license plates and driver licensing requirements.

You are st ill free to travel.

Eddyarmstrong
1 month ago

Paris did the same a year ago because the streets became savage jungle conditions . The outcome has been safe , enjoyable , law and order restored , said everyone knowledgeable .

1000060391
Fred
Fred
1 month ago

What stronger signal could PBOT possibly give that scooters are NOT a serious transportation mode?

Imagine them saying, “Hey car and truck drivers! You are too dangerous so we are banning places to drive!”

No – you can’t. PBOT would never say that.

Watts
Watts
1 month ago
Reply to  Fred

Scooters are not a serious transportation mode.

chris
chris
1 month ago
Reply to  Watts

No, they’re a fun transportation mode 🙂

At least they look like it, I’ve never tried one, but I see plenty of others using them every day. One less car, right?

Watts
Watts
1 month ago
Reply to  chris

“One less car, right?”

I doubt it. Probably one less transit ride.

chris
chris
1 month ago
Reply to  Watts

is that bad? I haven’t been on the bus in years, since before covid, and I never liked it. Always surrounded by people talking about rehab, their parole officers, and referring to all women as bitches, I’m sure it’s worse now. You did see that report that almost all transit tested show positive for meth and or fentanyl, right? no thanks

Watts
Watts
1 month ago
Reply to  chris

No, it’s not bad, unless you want transit to succeed in Portland.

TriMet needs to do something different, because what it’s doing now is failing.

Kyle Banerjee
1 month ago
Reply to  Fred

It’s hard to take seriously that the decision had to do anything with transportation, that temporarily removed a single option that’s only been used for a few years represents a significant threat to peoples’ ability to move about, or that this has anything to do with suppressing speech. It’s all about just trying to calm things down a notch, and preventing peoples’ livelihoods and safety from being meaningfully threatened.

I doubt the calm we’ve seen had anything to do with the ban. While the decision appears to have been unnecessary, I think it was correctly made based on past experience. We do not need a repeat of the chaos we had before.

I happen to live very close to one of the riot zones from a few years ago. As in we had tear gas in the house, cops, protesters, and Proud Boys on the lawn, and were listening to stun grenades late at night for months.

Yeah, boo hoo. But there are kids, vulnerable people, and animals living in residential areas directly adjacent. Out of control crowds have a life of their own, and too many don’t care (or at least don’t think) when they’re burning and destroying. Or what they’re destroying — which is scary if it’s a house you’re in and you know the forces out there are much greater than anything you can resist.

Having personally been in the riot zones many times while they were going on, I say screw everyone. At the very beginning, it made some sense. But what I consistently saw was a bunch of outsiders who don’t give a damn about the people who live there just to provoke what they wanted to show to advance their narrative.

If they want to wreck their own neighborhoods, that’s their business. Come to mine, and I’ll be looking out for the people who live here.

Michael O’Callaghan
1 month ago

Based on what authority ? Bully pulpet. Hulk no like.