Support BikePortland - Journalism that Matters

The BikePortland Podcast: The state of bike advocacy

Posted by on April 8th, 2014 at 10:13 am

Bike Summit Lobby Day on Capitol Hill-13

Cycle Oregon Executive Director Alison Graves,
Community Cycling Center CEO Mychal Tetteh and
Humans on Bikes founder Christopher Delaney at the
National Bike Summit in Washington DC last month.
(Photo by J.Maus/BikePortland)

Does Portland-area bike advocacy lack a unifying theme?

That’s one of the questions we tackle in the BikePortland podcast’s latest episode, about the state of bicycle advocacy in Portland and elsewhere.

“We don’t have a short-term goal for how we want bicycling to get better,” co-host Jonathan Maus says in this month’s half-hour show. “We just sort of follow a shiny object. Oh, Barbur road diet has to happen. Over here, there’s been some tragedy, we have to go focus on Vision Zero. Oh, let’s go talk about 20s Bikeway. There’s no fundamental, organizing principle that everybody can rally around. I think that’s a big gap we have right now.”

On the other hand, would a unifying theme really serve the city best? Has the bike movement outgrown political unanimity? These are the questions we explore and debate in this month’s show.

As always, we close with a how-to tip (this one about how to efficiently support your favorite bike advocacy groups) and Lily’s favorite TriMet-related tweets of the month.

I hope you’ll tune in to the next episode too, when we’ll ring in the summer by talking about bicycles and fashion.

You can subscribe to our monthly podcast with Stitcher or iTunes, subscribe by RSS, sign up to get an email notification each time we upload a new episode, or just listen to it above using Soundcloud.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for discrimination or harassment including expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

Leave a Reply

6 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
GerikCory PooleJonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)mikeMichael Andersen (News Editor) Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Jim Labbe
Jim Labbe

Great discussion. The diversity of bike advocacy is certainly a strength. It means more people tracking and weighing in on a greater number of issues and more spontaneously. I’d like to see more collaboration with pedestrian advocates which taps into an even broader constituency. I agree with changing the face of advocacy and building more neighborhood advocates. But it is important that those neighborhood advocates think and act on a city-wide and regional scale so that regional connectivity between communities (e.g. between East and West Portland) can be achieved. Also a regional strategy is essential to dealing with the inequities and disparities in access to good bike and pedestrian facilities.

Imagine if there was a sister-neighborhood program wherein Irvington, Madison South and Hazelwood Neighborhoods developed an alliance to implement the Tillamook Neighborhood Bikeway from MLK, through Gateway Green, to East Portland?

Finally, as to how we get to the next level of ridership. It may take greater inter-city bike connectivity via high speed rail and inter-state trail systems. That is a huge lift but a possible one. High speed rail in the united states needs a grassroots constituency.



Another huge concern for cyclists is the real and constant danger of bad drivers. Advocacy always seems to center upon infrastructure, but the wetware between the ears of drivers is something that can (with public will) be updated. Serious driver training. Serious penalties for distracted driving, Serious enforcement of violations. Sharing the road would be a lot less stressful if we were sharing with good drivers.

Driver Training, strict licensing, penalties and enforcement seem like low hanging fruit compared to the cost of a separate bike path design and construction.


Thanks for having this conversation and sharing it on the blog. I’ve got a couple thoughts listening to your webcast from my personal perspective working as the Advocacy Director at the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA).

I really like the idea of turning the Bicycle Transportation Alliance’s Project Advisory Council ( into something more like 1000 Friends of Oregon’s Land Use Leadership Initiative. This group of volunteers and community leaders has been working with the BTA to learn how to be more effective at the neighborhood level while representing bicycle issues in neighborhood conversations. We would love to grow the advocacy impact and community reach of that group. Email Carl Larson to volunteer or share ideas

I find Jonathan’s critiques of BTA’s advocacy to be interesting but schizophrenic. Saying the BTA would be more effective if we focused more on community organizing on the street level but somehow failing to mention our Blueprint for World Class Bicycling ( falls short of a real suggestion. After more than a thousand community-based conversations, we have taken on some huge of project advocacy goals. The success of these campaigns will be based in part on our ability to grow significant community support while connecting those supporters to effective advocacy tools. To say we are not conducting community-organizing work is a bit of a misnomer.

You say that the suit and tie/table of power approach has made the BTA more conservative and that that strategy is fraught with risk. Somehow it escaped your attention, or at least an honorable mention in the podcast, that we can draw a straight line between BTA’s advocacy work over the last 5 years and over $80 million dollars of investment in active transportation projects in Oregon. We won ~$20 million, twice, through ODOT Flex Fund Program and ~$20 million, twice, through Regional Flexible Fund program, plus some untold number of millions of dollars yet to be won in the context of Connect Oregon 5. All of these dollars represent hard fought victories by BTA.

When you combine the community-based work with the neighborhood level projects and the policy and funding advocacy you have a strong comprehensive approach that has won real results and allowed the BTA to remain a healthy and growing organization that is effective at advancing it’s mission and vision.

The state of bicycle advocacy is an excellent topic, and near and dear to my heart. Our growth beyond fighting for a seat at the table to a debate about what to do with that seat represents a great place to talk about strategy and tactics. There are clearly hundreds, probably thousands, of distinct roles that people can play in the realm of “bike advocacy.” BTA is only one voice in that conversation and I welcome folks’ advice, engagement, criticism, volunteerism, and membership. If you’ve got an idea for making BTA’s bike advocacy more effective in Oregon, the door is wide open. Email me at I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Kiel Johnson (Go By Bike)
kiel johnson

One thing I think was overlooked in this discussion is the impact of on the state of bike advocacy! It is great to have a transportation class but what about a full time blog that anyone with internet can read?!?! I think I great follow up podcast would be to have Rob, Gerik, Roger Geller, and maybe Joseph Rose, sit in a room alone together and talk about the impact of bikeportland on bike advocacy!

Cory Poole

Great Podcast!
Steve Novick did attend last summers Disaster Relief Trials. Does that count?