Thomas MacMillan File Photo
A plan to bring Zipcars to the train station is in limbo amid questions about whether a favored company is getting too sweet a deal.
Without a public bidding process, the city has put together an agreement with Zipcar that could leave the parking authority on the hook for $3,100 a month.
That’s a bad deal, said Alderman Darnell Goldson who plans to vote against the proposal.
Goldson made his comments after last week’s meeting of the Board of Aldermen’s City Services and Environmental Policy Committee meeting, at which the Zipcar contract was discussed. Goldson was one of several aldermen who were temporarily appointed to the committee after official members failed to show up.
The committee voted to table the item, in part to address Goldson’s concerns.
ZIpcar is a popular new car-sharing service aimed at helping urbandwellers avoid owning their own vehicles. Instead, they sign up to rent cars on an as-needed basis to go shopping or take day trips.
At issue is a four-party agreement among Zipcar, Yale, the city, and the New Haven Parking Authority. The deal would result in an expansion of Zipcar services in New Haven from Yale campus to the city train station. The parking authority would provide free parking spaces at Union Station for two Zipcars. The city would help to market the service.
Goldson questioned a condition on the third page of the agreement (read it here), which states that the parking authority, technically an independent government agency (run by mayoral appointees) would be obligated to pay Zipcar the difference if it earns less than $3,100 each month on its two cars at Union Station. That money wouldn’t come directly from the city or from taxpayers. But Goldson said he still thinks it’s a bad deal and shouldn’t be supported.
Unless, that is, companies other than Zipcar are asked for bids. Goldson objected to the drafting of an agreement with a private company without extending the offer to others.
East Rock Alderman Justin Elicker, the chair of the City Services and Environmental Policy Committee, said a public bidding process is not necessary, since the agreement doesn’t require the city to pay anyone. Similarly, the parking authority’s agreement to pay Zipcar if it doesn’t meet its quota isn’t a problem since it doesn’t financially affect the city or taxpayers, Elicker said.
It’s unlikely that the parking authority would ever have to pay Zipcar for not meeting its quota, Elicker said. Zipcar has a similar agreement with Yale, which stores 26 Zipcars in campus parking spots. Yale has never had to pay Zipcar for lack of use, Elicker said.
The quota condition is a good part of the agreement, because it “incentivizes” the city to advertise, Elicker said.
Even if the parking authority does end up having to pay Zipcar, “not a dime comes out of taxpayer dollars,” Elicker said.
“At first glance, I agree it seems like the parking authority is getting a bad deal,” he said. “But we want Zipcars.” The hourly rental cars come with benefits to the city, like removing total cars from crowded streets and providing an option for people who can’t afford their own cars or don’t want to own them but need to use them occasionally, Elicker said. “Zipcar’s bringing a lot to the city.”
The city’s part of the agreement requires New Haven to appoint a marketer, most likely the director of the city Office of Sustainability, Elicker said. The city might issue a press release every now and then, put a link on the city website, or have literature on Zipcars available at certain public events, he said. Such minor considerations would amount to “virtually no financial burden on the city,” Elicker said.
At last Thursday’s meeting, the committee heard from a representative of Enterprise Rent-A-Car, who spoke about a subsidiary car sharing service called WeCar. Goldson suggested that the city should consider proposals from companies like WeCar before signing onto the Zipcar agreement.
Zipcar is still the best option, said Elicker. “I’m very interested in this stuff,” he said. “And I’ve never even heard of WeCar.”
WeCar isn’t viable, Elicker said. Further, Zipcar already has 26 cars in New Haven. Zipcar has an “economy of scale” and a “tried and true model,” he said.
Since the city would not make a financial investment because of the agreement, it doesn’t need to go out to bid, Elicker said. If, in the worst-case scenario, no one uses a train station Zipcar for a year, the parking authority would be out some $30,000, he said.
The agreement would not be exclusive, said Mike Piscitelli, the city’s traffic and parking czar. Zipcar is well-positioned now to partner with the city, but “as other companies mature,” they could also work with the city, he said.
Even if the city doesn’t have a direct obligation to pay Zipcar, the agreement could still adversely affect taxpayers, Goldson said. The parking authority is a public agency, and it will have two fewer money-making parking spaces for train commuters, Goldson said.
“That costs us money,” he said. “The taxpayer in the end will pay.”
“It’s still a bad deal,” Goldson said. “We don’t need to sign onto it.” Even if only the parking authority stands to lose money, “why do we want to endorse it?” Goldson said.
“It’s bad for everybody,” he said.
Little deals by themselves may not be a lot of money, he said. “But $36,000 here and there adds up.”
Goldson also objected to the lack of a public bidding process. “To hand [Zipcar] access to an overutilized lot is bad business for the city.”
If the process were opened up to other companies, he would support the agreement, Goldson said. But as it is, “it smells to me like favoritism.”