Fort Smith bike‑share program ends NSF funding; staff seek grants, sponsors to continue Ride for Smileys

City mobility coordinator Michael Means updated the Board of Directors on Ride for Smileys, the city’s bike‑share program established through a National Science Foundation grant and operated in partnership with the University of Arkansas and local operator Tandem Mobility.

Means said the NSF grant funded three years of operations and transportation research at no cost to the city and that the program produced roughly 2,500 users and about 9,300–9,500 trips over the multi‑year period. “Our most popular stations were Riverfront Park and Chaffee Crossing,” Means said, and he noted e‑bikes outperformed standard cruisers nearly two‑to‑one and attracted more new riders.

Means described the operator model and costs. The program operated eight docking stations and a fleet that at peak consisted of 40 bikes (20 e‑bikes and 20 cruisers). Means said rental fees were subsidized by the NSF grant (examples cited: $1 unlock, first half hour free; roughly $2/hour for e‑bikes under the grant model). He said Tandem Mobility owns the bikes and would remove them if operations cease; the city would not incur removal costs under the current operator agreement.

With NSF funding ending in June, Means said the program has been scaled to 15 bikes (10 pedal and five e‑bikes) funded to cover service into June, but long‑term operations would require a new revenue source. He said the city applied for multiple grants and was pursuing private sponsorships; he identified an RDoC TAP micro‑mobility match opportunity but said securing the required local match was a challenge. Means suggested the Central Business Improvement District (CBID) may be a natural sponsor because two of the top‑performing stations are downtown and the CBID is planning a transit hub project.

Board members asked for program performance and cost detail; Means said the program operator’s data shows station‑level ridership and that the city could scale to maintain a small number of high‑usage stations at a substantially lower cost than the full system. Director Kemp asked for the program’s “elevator pitch” on return on investment; Means pointed to access to jobs and essential services for some low‑income repeat users, benefits to health and access to parks and trails, and the program’s role in testing micro‑mobility in a small/mid‑sized city.

No new city funding was approved. Staff will continue to pursue grants, sponsorship and lower‑cost scaled options and will return with station‑level ridership and cost comparisons for board consideration.