How Wheeler, Bailey and Iannarone answered OPB’s question about bike safety

Posted by on May 6th, 2016 at 2:06 pm

Wheeler, Bailey, Iannarone.
(Photos: BikePortland)

Since many of you will probably spend some part of this weekend reading your voter’s pamphlet and/or filling out your ballot, here’s a quick way to compare how the three most prominent mayoral candidates are thinking about bike safey.

As part of their election coverage, Oregon Public Broadcasting asked Ted Wheeler, Jules Bailey and Sarah Iannarone a series of questions about key issues facing our city. One of the questions was: “What should city government’s role be in ensuring bike and pedestrian safety?”

Their answers are short and sweet. And because OPB offered audio clips for each question, it’s easy for us to share them here in succession:

Advertisement

Ted Wheeler

Jules Bailey

Sarah Iannarone

We’re lucky to have such a great field of candidates for mayor this year. And — given the political stagnation we’ve been through for so many years — it’s exciting that all of the leading candidates this year are actually embracing bikes.

Of course you need a lot more information about these candidates to make a final decision, so make sure to re-read our in-depth interviews with each of them and our coverage of various debates and other election news over the past few months.

— Jonathan Maus, (503) 706-8804 – jonathan@bikeportland.org

Our work is supported by subscribers. Please become one today.

Please support BikePortland.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are productive, considerate, and welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. 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

13 Comments
  • John Liu
    John Liu May 6, 2016 at 2:08 pm

    BP’s coverage of the mayoral race has been very helpful for me, as I decide for whom to vote.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Avatar
      Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 6, 2016 at 2:12 pm

      Thanks John! Glad to hear that. We’ve been thinking and talking amongst ourselves quite a bit about whether or not we should do an endorsement. With the race being so tight it’s tempting… But we’ve decided against it. I think for us the best thing to do is to empower the community to make as informed a choice as possible. We’ve put a lot into our mayoral coverage this year… More than we’ve ever done before. So it’s good to hear it has helped you (and hopefully others).

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Avatar
      9watts May 6, 2016 at 5:58 pm

      I concur.

      But pedestrian and bicycle safety (so phrased) is easy to be in favor of. Prioritizing funding and using the bully pulpit to move away from auto dependence is a truer litmus test, I’d venture.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Avatar
    Chris May 6, 2016 at 3:49 pm

    What about a recommendation for which candidates for other city/county/state positions would back mountain bike trails?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Avatar
    soren May 7, 2016 at 11:25 am

    It’s one thing to say that you support funding active transport while campaigning but it’s another thing entirely to take on the political risk of publicly pushing for actual funding. This is especially the case when we have a sitting commissioner who is somewhat hostile to human-powered transport and two sitting commissioners who show few signs of interest. I’ve not heard any of these candidates propose specific funding mechanisms for human-powered transportation infrastructure. Pretty campaign rhetoric and fairy dust goals do not equal progress as our shameful history of unfunded and unfulfilled bike plans demonstrate.

    SHOW ME THE EFFING MONEY!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Avatar
      Terry D-M May 8, 2016 at 9:31 am

      Sarah has been very clear she would start by eliminating all public automobile subsidizes…..especially unpriced parking. Now that is not a direct funding strategy of ” this money goes here,” but it is eliminating a huge public drain that can be used for active transportation that she, and we all, want.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Avatar
        soren May 8, 2016 at 1:35 pm

        IMO, linking parking pricing to funding for human-powered transport is counterproductive. There is broad support for safer pedestrian and cycling infrastructure in Portland while parking pricing is more controversial. The unwillingness of current commissioners and mainstream candidates to propose new revenue sources makes seems Adams-esque to me. Moreover, this unwillingness to discuss revenue stands in stark contrast to Seattle where elected commissioners supported a levy that will spend $320 million on safety improvements (including over 110 miles of new bikeways) over 9 years. I’m voting for the gas tax but it’s a bit of a farce. Peanuts.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Avatar
          Terry D-M May 9, 2016 at 6:28 am

          I never said they were linked I said she would stop the subsidies, that will require a broad education and add significantly to our city funding stream. The gas tax a a joke that I am also voting for, but until we have broad statewide taxation modernization I don’t see us moving forward very far. This state is the most libertarian in the country, culturally liberal…..flat taxes and user fees.

          Can you Say Art’s tax?

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Avatar
            Lester Burnham May 9, 2016 at 7:46 am

            Until all those drivers from surrounding counties pay their share for clogging Portland up, then NO on that damn gas tax. We’ve already been pistol whipped for the Sellwood bridge project.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Avatar
    Spiffy May 9, 2016 at 8:12 am

    transcript would be very helpful…

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Avatar
    Evan Manvel May 9, 2016 at 8:58 am

    It’s great everyone supports Vision Zero. But it’s also time for all the candidates to understand Vision Zero.

    Both Wheeler and Bailey miss in their summaries, while Iannarone didn’t summarize it.

    Vision Zero is not “zero vulnerable users fatalities in the transportation system” as Bailey states nor “to eliminate some of the bicycle and pedestrian issues we’ve seen across the city” as Wheeler states.

    “Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all.”
    http://visionzeronetwork.org/what-is-vision-zero/

    To reiterate, Vision Zero is for everyone. Most people who are killed or seriously injured in traffic are in cars.

    My sister’s life has been turned upside down from a serious car injury years ago. Lost her career, her family’s life has focused on taking care of her and her unpredictable health, etc. It’s a story that is repeated hundreds of thousands of times, on top of all the people whose lives have been lost to traffic violence.

    This is totally preventable. Portland’s future mayor needs to sharpen his/her message on it if we’re going to get it done.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Avatar
      9watts May 9, 2016 at 9:02 am

      Excellent point, Evan. Thanks.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Avatar