Syracuse DPW committee presses Veo on delayed AI parking tool, low equity program uptake

Syracuse City Department of Public Works committee members on an evening meeting pressed Veo, the private micromobility operator, for timelines and data on promised technology and equity measures while hearing the company’s operational updates.

The exchange focused on two outstanding commitments from Veo’s renewal: an AI-powered “virtual parking coach” meant to prompt correct rider parking and a set of equity (access) discounts tied to destination geofences. Veo officials said the parking coach will be enabled “by the middle of the month” and that the city’s geofence team was drawing the equity zones the day of the meeting, but committee members said they remain unconvinced by repeated timetable assurances.

Veo’s chief operating officer, Connor Muldoon, said the company views micromobility as part of Syracuse’s transportation mix and highlighted usage among city employees, including sanitation workers using the DPW campus site. “About 26% of our households do not have access to a vehicle,” Muldoon said, arguing that scooters and bikes serve residents and city staff. Muldoon and Jeff, Veo’s local representative, repeatedly framed the delayed software integrations as industry‑wide technical challenges rather than Syracuse‑specific problems.

Despite the software delays, Veo reported measurable operational improvements. Paul Cole Bruffo, identified by Veo as the local operations manager, said technicians perform multiple safety checks and that scooters enter a self‑diagnostic “error mode” when a mechanical issue arises. Veo said it operates roughly 1,300 scooters this season, maintains about 50 re‑distribution “hubs” across the area, and fields four vans that operate nearly around the clock to service vehicles.

On tip‑over alerts — an automated detection that flags scooters lying on their side — Veo said the system reports alerts “essentially instantly” to the company. Median response time to tip‑over events has fallen from about 16 hours last year to 5 hours 20 minutes this season, the company said, a roughly 66% improvement. Veo also told the committee it had recorded about 62,000 tip‑over events last season and is pacing about 250 per day this season, with more than 37,000 season‑to‑date.

Committee members pressed Veo on the equity program’s reach. Veo said enrollment and use in the means‑tested access program rose from just over 100 active riders to 278, while the system has about 20,000 unique riders overall — or roughly 1.5% participating in the access program. “That’s absolutely fair criticism,” Veo’s representative said when committee members noted the mismatch between city households without vehicles and access‑program takeup. Veo added that non‑means‑tested membership products (Veo Plus and Veo Commuter) have increased — Vo Plus at about 2,100 members and Vo Commuter about 600 — and that overall membership was up 46% year‑over‑year.

On complaints and removal timing, Veo said reported problems (calls or photos to customer support or city line) receive faster attention than automated tip‑over alerts: median response to an explicit report is about two hours, while tip‑over alerts are triaged behind higher‑priority reports such as potential ADA obstructions. Paul Cole Bruffo told the committee he reviews short rides and low ratings daily and sends mechanics to inspect flagged scooters; Veo said it employs five mechanics and is training a sixth.

Veo provided preliminary financial information: the company has paid the city slightly more than $14,000 so far this year and said it expects to pay more than initially forecast as ridership has grown. In describing other cities’ approaches, Veo referenced Washington, D.C.’s program structure where the city offers permit‑fee rebates tied to strict equity and performance metrics.

Committee members asked for clearer reporting and outreach. Councilor Williams and others requested census‑tract or ZIP‑level overlays to verify whether membership and discounted rides reach target neighborhoods; Veo said it would provide that data. Veo also committed to share a slide deck, footage of the AI tool in action and ready‑made complaint‑reporting graphics the company said could be used in council newsletters and social channels.

For next steps, Veo said it will deliver the requested reports and the company’s materials to the committee and continue geofence work to activate opportunity/equity zones. Committee members expressed continued concern that five months after the operator returned to city streets, the promised AI parking and equity maps were still not fully in service.

The meeting concluded with Veo’s pledge to supply the requested documentation and metrics to DPW staff and councilors.