Interview: PBOT Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty on the Hawthorne decision, traffic enforcement, and more

Posted by on February 19th, 2021 at 11:38 am

(Photo: City of Portand)

I spoke to Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty on the phone last Friday. We covered a lot of ground. The interview below has been slightly edited for clarity and brevity.

You have experience as an activist, community organizer, and politician. What will you take from those experiences that can be helpful in leading the transportation bureau?

“Oh absolutely no question about that. It’s actually even how I move policy conversations: You will never see me move big policy conversations without having a lot of detailed conversations with those most impacted. Whether that’s activists or business or nonprofits — there’s always a constituency behind me. Because it’s not about me, it’s about the people that I represent that I make sure are in the conversations and help them to develop better policy.”

Advertisement

“We should not be expanding a freeway, we should be putting congestion pricing in place now.”

Your predecessor very intentionally took Portland out of a partnership with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the I-5 Rose Quarter project. Do you plan to re-engage ODOT on that project?

“I want to work back to the table, but I’m not coming back without some concessions from ODOT like A) if I’m at the table, they’re actually going to listen to my input and it’s going to inform the decisions they’re making. I’m not going to be there as a rubber-stamp. I’ve also reached out to the Albina Vision and they have some very specific policy recommendations around the highway caps they want developed. ODOT is saying, ‘Oh, well, that will increase the price significantly.’ I don’t believe that at all. And in fact, ODOT has the same responsibility that the City of Portland has, which is to undo previous racist policies that had a detrimental impact on communities of color.”

So if I’m hearing you right, you’ll continue to hitch PBOT’s position to Albina Vision Trust, but unlike your predecessor you will return to the table?

“What I want to do is be in a position to actually influence ODOT, so ODOT doesn’t believe that they’re the only decision maker at the table. That doesn’t mean I’m in lockstep with Albina Vision or anybody else at this moment. But what I know is if you’re not at the table, you’re for lunch.”

What about the actual freeway expansion plans: Should we expand the I-5 freeway through the Rose Quarter or not?

“We should not be expanding a freeway, we should be putting congestion pricing in place now. And any maintenance that we need to do to correct interchanges, we should talk about how we do that. If we put congestion pricing in place now, it gives us the ability to actually A) reduce vehicle miles traveled and B) actually create resources to invest in the things we want. My fear about tolls is it’ll be used for for freeway activity, whether it’s maintenance or construction. And and as the commissioner in charge of PBOT, I can’t move PBOT into the future if we are dependent on gas tax revenue and parking fees. (Note: The Commissioner might have been speaking about the I-5 Bridge Replacement Program in this answer, which is a separate project.)

But what will you do when ODOT just says, “Yes we are working on congestion pricing and it’s years down the line” and in the meantime they move forward on the project? Do you just walk away at that point?

“My best superpower is as that I’m an organizer, right. And so my voice will be a loud voice or ensuring that we are investing in the things that lead us into our future, and reduce vehicle miles traveled and air pollution and all the other climate mitigation strategies that are in our Climate Action Plan.”

Advertisement

Let’s shift gears: What’s your view of the current council? Do you see any opportunity to collaborate with other commissioners like Rubio who has the Parks bureau and Mapps who has environmental services and water?

“I think maybe that was a missed opportunity.”
— on the Hawthorne decision

“So let me say that we have a totally different city council than we had just five years ago. A super-majority of the city council is made up of grassroots community members. And the majority of us actually are deeply embedded in community. We are not career politicians, we don’t have the historic, ‘We’ve always done it this way,’ style. And all of us are in regular communication. [Because of the pandemic] I think we have this once in a generational opportunity for us to think broadly, and I have to say I am so I’m really thrilled with my new colleagues. I know we won’t always be in lockstep in agreement, but I am so thrilled that they come to this job from a very grassroots approach. There’s only one exception, and that’s the Mayor. And let me say, when Mayor Wheeler gave me PBOT, he told me to be bold and be visionary. And so I’m going to hold him to those words.”

You’ve made it clear that one of your top priorities are carfree districts. Can you flesh out your carfree vision a bit more?

“Here’s what I know: Downtown has a enormous amount of empty storefront spaces. And as I continue to have conversations with both the Portland Business Alliance and other business groups, I’m reminding them that that overpriced office space that has been vacant since the pandemic began, those businesses are going to do a cost analysis and realize they don’t need as much office space as they did in the past. I think how workers work will be a lot different as we emerge from the pandemic. Will people need some space? Yes. But we have a lot of space downtown that we can actually have a year-round flea market or farmers market and making those spaces more accessible for small, minority and women-owned businesses.

As one example, what would it take to have a international district downtown? We have Chinatown. But we could actually create other international districts that would have food and music and give people gathering spots, that would be a different location without the fear of automobiles running you over. I don’t know yet which streets would be carfree. As you know, that’s going to take a lot of thought and a lot of collaborative work. But I’m just trying to put a big picture vision out there. And I want to say not just downtown, right? We have business districts all over the city of Portland. And if we’re going to come back from this pandemic, we have to make sure that downtown is accessible for the diversity of community that we have. It certainly was not that way prior to the pandemic. And in fact, we had some cultural norms that really didn’t like having Black people downtown. We had these secret rules that would over-police Black people where there was a hip-hop club coming to town. So we have to really make sure that we’re creating a space that is accessible and available for all of our diverse communities.”

Do you see these as a temporary thing like a farmers market or something more substantial?

“I see it as substantial and permanent. I mean, right now we’re working on some very specific projects downtown: We’re working to reopen O’Bryant square, we’re looking at creating a ‘Culinary Corridor’. And PBOT has been really creative when it comes to how we supported local restaurants to be able to use the public right-of-way and create areas where outside dining was possible. So what we’ve learned some things in the pandemic, that we should expand upon and move to other parts of the city.”

You made a recent statement on “vehicular violence”. Those are strong words and I wonder what spurred that for you?

“We’ve had we’ve had a real spike in automobile violence of late. As someone who lives in East Portland, I actually live in one of the best areas in Gateway, I can walk everywhere to get my needs met. But I’ve gotta’ tell you, every time I walk at night, in the wintertime, I take my life into my hands. And to actually see someone get into an automobile and intentionally try to mow down as many people as possible; there was no other term to describe what people experienced with that driver. And police have said, so far, there were no drugs in his system. There was no alcohol. There’s no claim of mental defect and there was no claim of political motivation. Why would somebody do that? I mean, so to me, that was what brought the term to my mind.”

So what do we do about this spike in automobile violence?

“Well, I am someone who was vehemently opposed to red light cameras, just the technology around our cameras and giving people tickets, because what we know is that it is normally implemented in a way that actually causes Black, indigenous and other people of color more harm, right Because they’re more targeted for police action. And in fact, there’ve been raised in many incidents of Black and indigenous and other people of color dying because of a traffic stop. So I was very concerned about that. But here’s the reality: The reality is that with Vision Zero, we have to include new crossings, we have to improve lighting, and we have to slow vehicles down. And if we don’t get vehicles to slow down, we will continue to have these deaths at the hands of vehicles. What I know is that at the end of the day, vehicles have a much higher responsibility. Because if you hit a person, the harm that you’re going to do, could lead to death. So we clearly need more aggressive tools to ensure that we’re slowing down automobiles as they drive through very dense urban communities.”

I hear you, but the man behind the Buckman rampage had a bunch of speeding tickets already. He wouldn’t have cared about a camera, he didn’t care about any rules, or any safe crossings or any street lights. Do you think it’s time to take more aggressive action to fortify our streets and do more traffic calming to prevent these kind of behaviors?

“Well, actually, we can only do what we have the budget to do. And as you know, PBOT’s budget has been significantly impacted by Covid. And so we have to prioritize. Most of the streets in my neighborhood aren’t event paved.”

Advertisement

I hear you. But right now in a PBOT maintenance yard I bet we have dozens of concrete barriers and it wouldn’t cost much to drag them onto a street to create a traffic calming feature, like a chicane, on a street like Stark would it?

“We cannot tell people we want them out of their cars if we don’t have a good public transit system that is accessible for the people who need it most.”

“Let me just say I’m open to new ideas about how we resolve some of these really critical issues that we have. I’m not bought into any one way of doing it. But I also have to be mindful that, you know, we have the resources that we have, and we’re going to have a lot less resources next year, and a whole lot less than a year after, before we start seeing an economic recovery. So unlike the federal government, we have to actually operate within our budget. Can we look at our strategic plan and find some things we need to move up because we have this opportunity to start building towards our future, rather than continuing to invest in things that we’re trying to move away from? Yes, absolutely. And we will have the opportunity to do that. But I cannot commit today. Whether that strategy is better than another strategy, I’m going to be looking at any and all opportunities to create safer streets for all modes of transit.”

Given how we know people will use cars as weapons, is there anything from your work on gun violence that you think is applicable to this issue?

“Well, let me just say that violence is absolutely on the rise across the board. And what we’re seeing all over the country is an increase in all kinds of violence… We’ve seen this huge rise in gun violence which is why I’m really committed to talking about community safety holistically, and not from any one perspective… Police don’t make our communities safe, but they are one piece of having a safe community, right? Portland Street Response will be another response to creating community safety. We have to work collaboratively across bureaus.”

So on the car violence/gun violence analogy, you’re saying you see this as more of a social problem and that the car in this situation is just another weapon someone can use if they’re having mental challenges?

“Right. It’s just one of the tools to violently engage with other community members.”

And so you’re saying let’s focus on the upstream causes that lead to someone using their car as a tool like this?

“Yes, especially when we know there weren’t any mitigating factors. I mean, there’s no excuse for what he did. But the fact that there were no mitigating factors. We can’t just say, ‘Well he was drunk and he didn’t know what he was doing.’ This guy wanted to hurt people and kill people and he was successful.That’s violence. He just used a vehicle instead of a gun.”

If we think of what happened on 1/25 as violence, which I think most Portlanders would agree that it is violence, do you think that should increase our urgency to fortify our streets against that sort of violence, in the same way we take measures to improve responses to things like domestic violence or gun violence? Should a recognition that cars are being used for violence change the level of urgency from our transportation bureau?

“Well, we should be responsive to the immediate needs, as well as planning or the vision of where we’re moving. And where PBOT has the authority to make changes. I mean, as you know, sometimes transportation projects are on a list forever before they ever move with a sense of urgency. My work with the East Portland Action Plan made it really clear that without that community pressure, the City of Portland would never have prioritized those investments. So you know, government does what government does. They develop plans, they work on those plans. And government isn’t as nimble as the community. Just like the changes we made in the last budget. Those changes were made because tens of thousands of people took to the streets, right? I got 78,000 emails demanding changes and even the little changes that we were able to accomplish would not have happened without that pressure. That’s always my message: Advocates are supposed to do what they do, to advocate for the vision they want to see their governments adopt. Me on the inside, I am one voice. I’m sharing with my colleagues what my visions are; but there’s no question to me that the sense of urgency comes from the community, demanding that we do better.

But again, I have to do it within a budget I have. And I have to make sure that in that budget, I am actually prioritizing the highest need areas. So again, I haven’t actually done my really deep dive into PBOT’s budget requests. And I’m really trying to understand all these big projects that have been on the table for a while, I want to make sure that when I start talking about a policy we have moving forward, that I will move that policy forward based on my conversations with a whole host of stakeholders who are impacted by it. To me, transportation justice means we’ll build a transportation system based on the people who have the least options.

Switching back to more local issues. Many of our readers are concerned about changes at the Portland Police Bureau Traffic Division and what it means for enforcement. Can you speak to that?

“Recently, the police have been doing this very destructive narrative around doing away with the Traffic Division, and putting those officers on patrol. I want to be clear that any police officer has the ability to write a ticket for traffic infractions. It is not a specialized expertise. They are all qualified to hold people accountable for illegally using our streets. I am so frustrated with this narrative around, ‘We just don’t have any officers.’ So the narrative is, ‘Just give us more money and more people, and we’ll be fine.’ I just I want to make sure your readers understand: We have not impacted traffic enforcement at all. Because any patrol officer can write a ticket otherwise, why are they a patrol officer?”

Other cities have taken steps to decrease the use of armed police officers in transportation-related functions like enforcement, crash investigations, and so on. Former Commissioner Chloe Eudaly said she had begun talks about doing that in Portland. Can you share details on where those conversations are at the moment?

“Well, the first thing we have to do is change the law in Salem. State law requires a law enforcement person to view [automated camera] tickets before they are sent to people. We have to change that before we can then start talking about where’s the most appropriate bureau to process tickets. And to give out of tickets, frankly, because in some cities you have non-sworn people who actually give out tickets, a job that doesn’t necessarily need somebody that’s weaponized. So yes, I am very interested in that conversation. And and having legislative conversations around changing the state law.”

Have you taken concrete steps to change the enforcement camera law to remove the sworn officer requirement?

(Commissioner Hardesty said she needed to check on this information. I heard from her office after the interview that the City of Portland’s legislative team is pursuing an amendment to House Bill 2530 that would allow for non-sworn personnel to review and issue citations through fixed photo radar. The bill as currently written would only repeal a sunset on the use of the cameras in Portland.)

And what about the cameras themselves? We’ve heard about a procurement delay preventing any new ones from being used. Is that still there? And are you taking steps to get these cameras out sooner?

“The answer is yes. We have a backlog at our procurement office and now there’s no director. Procurement has been a problem for 32 years. I’ve been advocating on procurement reform, as long as I’ve been advocating on police reform. Every program that we have at the City of Portland that is supposed to benefit minority and women owned firms, the primary beneficiaries of white men, the second, primary beneficiaries are white women. And people of color are getting almost nothing.”

Are you saying the delays in procurement are related to delays around evaluations of minority-owned business contracts?

“No. I think it’s just the way we process contracts. It’s amazing to me how long it takes to actually process something…. I just think it’s fear of being innovative. Honestly, when I first got to the city, what I saw was that the city operates from a position of fear, and it’s really hard to be creative when you’re operating from a position of fear.”

Funny you say that because I’ve been saying the same thing about PBOT for many years!

“Oh really?”

Yes. Fear often paralyzes PBOT from moving things forward — especially when the topic of race is in the equation. There are so many policymakers and advocates who just can’t talk about race in a way that gets them over their paralysis around it. So they end up either doing the wrong things or saying the wrong things or doing nothing at all.

“Oh yes, no doubt about that! But let’s talk about Hawthorne…”

Given that we started the project with a blank slate, what would have been your ideal vision for Hawthorne?

“To widen the street so that a variety of transportation options would be available for people. (Note: PBOT made it clear from the start widening the street was never an option due to the project scope.) Hawthorne is one of the smallest streets that we have in the city of Portland. And today you take your life in your hands with any mode of transportation. I have been one of those people, sitting on a bus for a half-hour crawling up Hawthorne. I’ve been one of those people trying desperately to cross the street on Hawthorne during a busy time of day. But it’s also a street where there’s a lot of foot traffic. And I know that a biking community would love to see a bike lane. If there was a way to do that and make sure that people with disabilities would be able to safely cross, that cars and public transit would be able to safely cross, if we were actually redesigning Hawthorne, those would be my priorities. But remember, this is not a redesign. This is a maintenance project — specifically to ensure that pedestrian safety is increased.”

Do you think pedestrian safety and the presence of a bike lane are mutually exclusive?

“I don’t think they would be mutually exclusive at all. No. But again, if I had the opportunity to redesign, bike lanes would be an automatic part of a massive redesign. But this is a maintenance project to ensure that pedestrians are able to use Hawthorne safely and that we move traffic through Hawthorne without having one of our major public transit lines stuck on on Hawthorne forever. A lot of people from East Portland are going through Hawthorne to do their day-to-day business. And it is a nightmare when you are a bus rider and you crawl along. Look what we did downtown with the Rose Lane. Overnight, the difference between how people could move was pretty incredible.”

How do you feel about the fact that the lanes now are wider? From nine to 11 and 12 feet, which could make people actually drive faster?

“The speed on Hawthorne is supposed to be 30 mph. Right now I am not concerned that people are going to automatically speed up because again, I mean, we still have the same number of lanes, the only difference is that we actually have a turn lane, which will allow for traffic to move much more freely. And we have, of course, bike lanes on two major streets very close by. (Note: She’s referring to shared streets with speed bumps and other traffic calming treatments.) And again, if you drive a car, you would say, there’s almost never any parking on Hawthorne, right? If you ride a bike, you would say, it’s really not easy to bike on Hawthorne. Right? Because of the backlog of vehicles that take up Hawthorne. So, again, there’s positives and negatives of the options that were considered. But at the end of the day, I come down on the side of the majority of people who agreed with the options that we’re moving forward. So they are the people who are most impacted by the changes that are happening.

Again, the goal is not to increase the speed of traffic, this is a really kind of a dense neighborhood. And again, if we had the opportunity to be redesigning we may have made different decisions. My decision is really based on the detailed work that PBOT did in reaching out to the Hawthorne community and overwhelmingly the Hawthorne communities said they did not want to bike lanes on Hawthorne.”

I don’t know if I would agree with that. I heard and saw from a lot of people that said they did want the bike lanes. What do you say to all those people — the dozens of business owners, all the young people who ride bikes in that neighborhood, and the nearly 2,500 people who signed a petition saying they want bike lanes on Hawthorne?

“When you actually communicate directly with the residents who are also impacted, they overwhelmingly chose an option. I think that’s a good option to go with.”

(*Note: According to PBOT’s survey data, 51% of people who live adjacent to Hawthorne Blvd chose the no bike lane design. 27% preferred bike lanes. Business owners were closely split with 41% opposing bike lanes and 38% in favor of them. Of all survey respondents, 45% chose the option PBOT went with (no bike lanes) and 43% chose a bike lane option as their second favorite choice.)

So if there was a situation where a majority of people said they wanted bike lanes, would you be willing to reassess the decision?

“I think we’ve done the due diligence necessary for me to be comfortable that this is the right decision for the limited resources we have at this time. If pedestrians are able to move more freely, and there’s better lighting, if there’s better crosswalks, people are going to be safer on Hawthorne, no matter what form of transit they use. And I think that’s the goal that we all have. And with the resources we had to do a maintenance project, I think this is the best we could do at this time. It doesn’t mean that, you know, one day down the road, when there’s other dollars to do a redesign, that [bike lanes] won’t be reconsidered. But this are all about safety improvements.”

I keep hearing your concern for safety. The bike lane options would have reduced the amount of lanes for driving from four to two, and it seems to me the fewer lanes for driving would equal a safer street.

“I don’t know that that would have actually made air quality better. I don’t know that that would have moved public transit any faster. In fact, all the data that I’ve seen showed that it would slow down response times from first responders and add something like seven or eight additional minutes, if we had put bike lanes on Hawthorne.”

Part of my concern is there’s been a lack of transparency from PBOT in terms of what these delay numbers are. The initial transit delay estimate at Cesar Chavez of 8-16 minutes had an outsized influence on the project and PBOT acknowledged their initial recommendation of no bike lanes was based on incomplete modeling. Then when they came back five months later with a new analysis, but they still haven’t released the transit delay numbers. That makes it impossible to have a full debate about the trade-offs.

“So let me just say this about the future: The Hawthorne project is done as far as I’m concerned. And based on everything that I’ve heard — I’ve heard from advocates, and I’ve heard from PBOT and I’ve read the surveys — based on all the information I have, I think that PBOT made the best decision they could with the limited resources they have.

But that’s Hawthorne right? Let’s talk about how I make decisions.

I make decisions by actually having real conversations with people on all sides of the issue… As I told people when I was running, I will always have community meetings, I will always come and talk to those most impacted and the advocates around it and the businesses that support or oppose it. I love having those kind of hard conversations. We’re not going to always agree. But what I promise activists and advocates when I was running is that they will always have an audience who will always debate what options we have. And once I come to a decision, I will be straightforward about what the decision is. And so that’s how I make decisions. That’s how I develop public policy. And I think based on the work that the Bureau has done, I am comfortable that the right decision was made there.”

What about bicycle access on main commercial streets in general. Do you think that’s something that we should strive for, as a city, to have bike lanes on streets like Alberta, Mississippi, Belmont?

“We should make sure that all communities, especially those that have been left out of a lot of public policy decisionmaking have options that include bikes, scooters, public transit. You know the best thing we could possibly do is make more investments in our public transit system using clean energy technology. I ordered the first electric fire truck for Portland Fire Bureau. I know that PBOT actually drives some of the dirtiest vehicles that we have. I’m talking to them about bio-diesel fuel.”

Given that you care about air quality and more affordable transportation options, do you think it’s a worthwhile aspiration to not have people being able to drive cars and park them for free on these really important main streets, which would free up space for healthier vehicle use like scooters, Biketown or bicycles?

“I mean, that’s why we’re looking at places all over the city to make carfree, so that community members have gathering spots where they can bike, they can scooter, they can do whatever it is they want to do within those areas. That’s where we’re moving towards, we’re moving towards less vehicle miles traveled.”

That’s my point. Right now the city is deciding to use their space for parking and driving, instead of other things that are actually way more aligned with our planning goals that all place a priority on biking over driving. I think that’s part of the issue with the Hawthorne decision is that we had an opportunity to set a different narrative — maybe not make a different decision — but at least set a different narrative around these commercial streets and who can access them. Because right now, if I want to go get an ice cream cone or buy something with my kid on my bicycle, we don’t feel welcome on those fun streets like Alberta, 23rd, Mississippi, Hawthorne. As a bicycle rider, the city of Portland’s basically saying sorry, you can’t ride here safely.

“I mean, we did that. Decades ago right? We created streets like Martin Luther King Jr., where as soon as we put up the (center) median we killed all the businesses on that street that were primarily Black-owned. Because people wanted to use Martin Luther King Jr. as a freeway to get to and from Vancouver. So I’ve been here 32 years, and I’ve seen how we invest in some communities at the expense of others. And in fact, I don’t even recognize most of northeast. I mean, for some people, it looks really great. For some people, it is not accessible the way we’ve redesigned it and set it up.”

Right. And those places like Martin Luther King Jr Blvd and other commercial streets remain so auto-centric. They’re scary and loud and they stink from emissions in the air and people get killed and hurt and intimidated on them. Yet I don’t see any tangible actions from PBOT, especially given the Hawthorne decision, that they’re willing to change that dynamic. Did you know that 25 years ago PBOT looked at the same section of Hawthorne to try to make it safer? And in 2021, 25 years later, they came up with basically the same decision they did in 1997.

“Interesting.”

That gives me some serious pause. Are we doing enough to actually live up to our words and values? I understand the complexity. I get it. I know PBOT is good at their job, and they do great analyses. But I just wonder if you feel any of that same concern around incrementalism that I do. Are we really a progressive city? Are we willing to do the hard work of actually changing some of these dynamics? On Hawthorne we had five lanes for driving: four regular lanes and a parking lane. And PBOT looked at that, had a blank slate to work with, did a year of analysis, and basically put back five lanes for driving. That, to me, is a red flag that we’re not actually changing the dynamic in a significant way and we’re not living up to our values.

“Let me just say that may not have been then, but we certainly are now. We have an opportunity as we start working our way out of this pandemic, to really start working towards the kind of city we want to build. And yeah, so you know, I think maybe that was a missed opportunity, I don’t know. But again, I can only base it on… I was not the commissioner in charge when this process started. And so I can only base my decision based on the information that I have. And I’ve heard from a lot of folks, and not just from PBOT. I’ve heard from advocates, on both sides, people who say what we decided is just horrible and others who say, ‘I want to say thank you, thank you, thank you, for listening to the residents and the community!’. I had no lack of input from a whole host of interests.

But again, you know I’m at the end of this project. I came in at the end, and projects I will lead, I will lead in a way that I told you about earlier, the way I do business. I think people are rightfully concerned because we have not yet been able to articulate where we’re headed coming out of this pandemic… and I see the multitude of crises we had last year as a wonderful opportunity for us to reimagine where we’re headed… If there’s an opportunity to actually change course and do things in a way that will benefit us for generations to come — and I love stealing the Native American saying about what we do today is for seven generations into the future — because that’s what we should be building for right? And we won’t get it all done in this first year. We certainly won’t do it in two, and probably not even in ten. But we’re starting to put the pieces in place today. And actually creating that shared vision of where we’re moving, then we’ll be measuring everything through that transportation justice planning work. And transportation justice for who? For the people with the least choices and options.”

Commissioner Hardesty on a custom-painted Biketown to honor veterans.
(Photo: Biketown/City of Portland)

What do you want your imprint to have been in terms of changing the course of PBOT?

“For one I want to make sure we are achieving our goal around Vision Zero and eliminating fatalities around traffic violence. Two: I want us to be either a fully free public transit system or on our way to be a free public transit system… So you know, for me, that’s a minimum, we cannot tell people that we want them out of their cars if we don’t have a good public transit system that is accessible for the people who need it most.”

I appreciate that you talk about transic access so much; but I hope you can also remember that when you talk about infrastructure, we need a continuous network for people to ride bicycles too. If we don’t, people won’t ride bikes.

“Well absolutely. We have to make it safe. So people can use a variety mode of transportation. And let me just say, I’m a member of Biketown now!”

That’s great. You looked great in that photo a few years ago.

“I did look good. But you know, I actually paid my own hard-earned money to get a Biketown membership. And I’m actually planning to buy an electric tricycle. Because honestly I am very uncomfortable trying to maneuver the city’s heavy electric bikes.”

Keep us posted on that tricycle Commissioner Hardesty. We all look forward to seeing you out on the streets. Thanks for taking time to talk with us.

— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and jonathan@bikeportland.org
— Get our headlines delivered to your inbox.
— Support this independent community media outlet with a one-time contribution or monthly subscription.

NOTE: Thanks for sharing and reading our comments. To ensure this is a welcoming and productive space, all comments are manually approved by staff. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for meanness, discrimination or harassment. Comments with expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia will be deleted and authors will be banned.

116
Leave a Reply

avatar
14 Comment threads
102 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
37 Comment authors
CalebMichael AnderseneawristeJeffJonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Don Courtney
Guest
Don Courtney

This is good work Jonathan.

Ovid Boyd
Guest
Ovid Boyd

Question: Has anyone indicated they will compete for Hardesty’s seat or is anyone considering it?

After seeing her talk about transportation when she was running a few years ago, I got the impression she had a very car centric view of our streets. Now seeing the first decision out of PBOT under her watch–widened car lanes, car parking spots instead of even basic biking facilities–combined with stuff beforehand–like being the only city council member opposed to Vision Zero and safe streets–I would definitely be up for supporting any less car centric opponent and would love to know if anyone has been considering running…

mark smith
Guest
mark smith

It’s a mirage that not being car centric will win. Any drive around Portland tells you that Portland is all about roads, roads…roads! It’s a mystery to me why there are a maze of one way roads (surface highways) through downtown. WTF. It makes no sense and encourages speeding/racing..death.

so yeah, no real walking/biking/transit person will win because..honestly…a lot of people who are poor…drive/have cars… and in fact, many people of color view bike lanes in their neighborhood as bad/gentrify/white people taking my home. That’s a fact and and it has been documented.

So, basically anti car is more or less pro privilege. Just stating the obvious.

Clint Culpepper
Guest
Clint Culpepper

This decision was certainly being made before she took over the bureau so to blame the final design on her is pretty disingenuous. Also, do you remember WHY she opposed Vision Zero? While it was difficult for many to understand at the time, it’s clear that she was right for using the opportunity to point out the very large flaw in the policy.

maccoinnich
Subscriber

This is a frustrating interview to read. Something I’ve repeatedly heard from PBOT staff is that they feel like they don’t have the leadership at City Hall to do bold things. And here we have a new Commissioner-in-Charge says that she wants to “bold and be visionary” and that they Mayor is behind her. But when it comes to Hawthorne, PBOT was clearly afraid of doing to the bold thing, and structured the whole public engagement process to make anything other than the option that they ultimately chose look bad. In an entire year of public engagement, why was there never a conversation about what it would really take to make Hawthorne work in a way that’s consistent with our Comprehensive Plan, which says to prioritize walking, cycling and transit over single occupancy vehicles?

zuckerdog
Guest
zuckerdog

On-street parking is like the Dakotas – Do we really need both a north and a south [side]? How about we try out just one Dakota and try to eliminate parking on one side of the street.

maccoinnich
Subscriber

Indeed. Whenever the topic of parking came up, PBOT staff would respond as if someone was suggesting removing all on-street parking and therefore hated small businesses. There was never a nuanced conversation about selective removal of parking to allow turn lanes where they’d actually make a difference (as an example: this street in Glasgow).

zuckerdog
Subscriber
zuckerdog

I’m confused, do people in Glasgow often drive in reverse?

David Hampsten
Guest
David Hampsten

The leftmost lane goes in the other direction. Britain uses white line markings the same way we use yellow and vice versa.

maccoinnich
Subscriber

If the question is about the direction in which a car is parked, there’s no law saying you have to park in the direction of travel.

Until now I’d never noticed that British road striping doesn’t distinguish between dividing lanes going in the same direction versus between dividing lanes going in the opposite direction, as American road striping does.

David Hampsten
Guest
David Hampsten

What I don’t understand is why folks in Britain and Ireland keep driving on the wrong side of the road, as nearly everyone else in Europe has learned to drive on the right side.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

There’s no law saying you have to park in the direction of travel.

I don’t know about Glasgow, but there is in Portland.

You must park in the direction of traffic at parallel and angle spaces. Motorcycles may angle park in a parallel space. Failure to park in the direction of traffic may be subject to citation.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/59926

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

But this is Portland. There may be a law you need to park in the direction of travel but it won’t be enforced (as enforcement is discriminatory to those that don’t follow the laws). Just like the leafblowers. Only certain quieter models are allowed. LOL. Why bother making all these rules if you ain’t gonna enforce them. Just a waste of taxpayer money to pay bureaucrats to create regulations we don’t enforce.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/civic/article/577551

Steve Scarich
Guest
Steve Scarich

I believe you are incorrect. You are required to have your right-side wheels next to the curb, in the direction of travel. That is when parallel parked. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also, it is one of the most dangerous things for cyclists, a car pulling out from the ‘wrong’ side of the road, and the driver initially cannot see you because he is block by the car facing him. So, he is several feet into the bike lane before he can see you.

Fred
Guest
Fred

True dat, Steve. Though I have lived in many cities and have received tickets for parking in the opposite direction of travel, but never in Portland. And I see so many cars parked this way in Portland that I’d wager most people think there *isn’t* a law here b/c it’s never enforced.

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

When I moved to Portland my neighbor said it is fine to park the wrong direction here. It even has a name he told me, the “Portland Pull Around”.

GlowBoy
Guest
GlowBoy

It is not technically legal, but it is generally only enforced on collector streets with center striping. It is “fine” and common practice to park on the left on residential streets (even more common in Seattle when I lived there, by the way, so “Portland Pull Around” doesn’t compute for me). But that doesn’t mean it’s legal in either city.

eawriste
Guest
eawriste

This is the real problem: parking and traffic counts precluding any safe design. The commissioner and PBoT personnel can reportedly support including other modes, but until there is a mandate via ballot or otherwise to force designs to include PBLs, I see no change. Are you familiar with the Cambridge mandate for PBLs? Hardesty herself said she prefers a consensus to include safe infra. Safety advocates are almost always in the minority.

Chris
Guest
Chris

Bike parking and the outdoor seating for restaurants tend to be in the parking strip. Where do those go? Do we need them on both sides of the street?

maccoinnich
Subscriber

I don’t think you’d even need to remove all parking on one side of the street to be able to introduce turn lanes where they’d be useful.

Chris
Guest
Chris

Guess I misread. I thought the suggestion was to remove parking for bike lanes.

Caleb
Guest
Caleb

The Dakotas analogy makes no sense to me. Unlike parking on two sides of the same street, those two states offer different things across vast distances. What have I misunderstood, zuckerdog?

cmh89
Guest
cmh89

. Something I’ve repeatedly heard from PBOT staff is that they feel like they don’t have the leadership at City Hall to do bold things.

If it’s like every governmental body I’ve worked for, the front line staff have lots of great ideas and constantly think about improvement and the C-suite staff are all lifers who are not interested in rocking the boat or deviating from how things have been done for years.

PBOT management needs some turnover.

eawriste
Guest
eawriste

Thank you for your work on this mac. I think we all know the process of street design at PBoT is broken, and Hardesty’s answers concerning the process was underwhelming at best. I fear we are in for another 4 years of the same.

rabs
Guest
rabs

Lincoln Street and Salmon Street say hello

soren
Guest
soren

The Salmon NG is increasingly stressful due to cut-through traffic and this will almost certainly worsen due to construction and lane changes on Hawthorne. I hope that “Healthier Hawthorne” supporters will join me in advocating for cheap and effective diversion (and BMUFL signs) on SE Salmon. Given PBOT’s committment to crossing improvements, there is also an opportunity to create another cheap Neighborhood Greenway/SRTS segment on 34th from Division to Stark. Crossing treatments are also needed at SE 30th and SE 11th/12th (but these are more $$$-constrained asks).

Momo
Guest
Momo

I agree that diverters on Salmon and a new neighborhood greenway on 34th would be really nice improvements. 34th has been a signed bike route for a really long time, and even has the old circular pavement markings. And it already has speed bumps! Just needs sharrows and a diverter or two.

GlowBoy
Guest
GlowBoy

Salmon definitely needs more diverters. All NGs should have these every few blocks.

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

Wow, that is an embarrassing interview.

Hardesty thinks we can recover our downtown economy with a farmer’s market and a swap meet or two. LOL. I’m sure people will be rushing from all over the US to “Plywood Portland” stepping over tents, garbage and excrement to go buy $8 organic eggs and replica Bernie Sanders mittens.

Come on JoAnn. ***Portion of comment deleted by moderator***

maccoinnich
Subscriber

The huge growth in the number of food carts happened as Portland emerged from the last recession, and it’s one of the things that made downtown Portland so successful in the past decade. The carts in downtown largely relied on there being surface parking parking owned by one family; those lots are now being redeveloped (as was always expected to happen). The idea of having “international districts that would have food and music and give people gathering spots, that would be a different location without the fear of automobiles running you over” or indeed indoor year round markets is a pretty logical extension of that food cart culture (and has international precedent).

Fred
Guest
Fred

I tend to agree with Nadia here. The most troubling thing to me about this interview was the part where Jo Ann explained how she makes decisions, in an apparently collaborative and transparent way. But what is her expertise on transportation that enables her to make *good* decisions? We have no idea, yet we know that professionals (many of them are here on BP) spend entire lifetimes perfecting their craft as transportation professionals. And here we have a complete amateur, who looks good in a photo on a bike, not just in charge of transportation policy but actually runs the day-to-day operational details! I have no problem with any person running for office and getting elected and engaging in the messy business of making policy. But in no universe should such an amateur have her hands on the operations AND the policy.

That nice photo of Jo Ann on the bike has always bothered me b/c it is essentially false. She does *not* ride a bike in Portland to any degree, and her comment about buying the electric three-wheeler just shows how out of touch with cycling she really is. Again, I’m not saying every politician should be a regular cyclist, but you can’t really make good decisions about cycling til you’ve ridden many miles on skinny tires.

Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

No commissioner runs the day-to-day operations of a bureau like PBOT. Their role is policy, and they are always operating in the larger environment of the entire council, who would need to approve any large policy or budgetary changes.

It is good to have a commissioner in the position to dig deeper than they could if the bureaus answer to the council at large.

Steve Scarich
Guest
Steve Scarich

I believe you are incorrect. Commissioners have ‘line’ authority over their agencies, meaning they are responsible for day-to-day decision-making as well as hiring/firing decisions. They are not like State Legislators, who lack either of those authorities.

Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

Maybe I’m mistaken, but it seems inconceivable that someone could be making run-of-the-mill decisions for several bureaus, some of which, like PBOT, are very complex, and could also be doing the day-to-day work of being a city commissioner. Is that even humanly possible?

PS
Guest
PS

If you are mistaken, it would go a long way to explaining why so many of the bureaus are run so poorly. Of course, changing leadership constantly can’t help. Though I think you’re spot on, they are figureheads and have career professionals doing the heavy lifting.

Clint Culpepper
Guest
Clint Culpepper

What makes you think that Commissioner Hardesty can’t be a good advocate for bicycles because she doesn’t currently ride? I don’t ride transit regularly but advocate for it relentlessly because I know that it’s a vital piece of our transportation infrastructure. Should I not be trusted to do that?

Tony Jordan (Contributor)
Subscriber

This is quite an elitist opinion and a pretty gross one that seems to have some sexist undertones and it reflects poorly on the Portland cycling community.

pruss2ny
Guest
pruss2ny

care to flesh out what is “elitist” and “pretty gross” and which MIGHT have some “sexist undertones”? if you are talking about Fred’s comments, I see someone who is exasperated and concerned that there is alot of earned knowledge that MIGHT be being overlooked while people fawn over a placating photo…

again…if you’ve read any of my comments below, i’m not trying to be a dick…just Fred seemed to make some points and instead of addressing them, you seem to be questioning the contents of his/her heart.

PS
Guest
PS

Is that where we are now? Having some expectation of competency in decision makers and leadership is elitist?

Tony Jordan (Contributor)
Subscriber

I am absolutely questioning whether Fred would make similar comments in a similar manner about a man. I think the comment about needing to be a vehicular road cyclist is elitist.

It’s true, I don’t know a lot about “Fred” he’s anonymous, but I have a hunch and I think that the attitude is gross and counter productive and I know for a fact that comments like that drive people away from the site because people tell me so.

pruss2ny
Guest
pruss2ny

appreciate the response…i’m a cager, not a biker..but i’ve long complimented BP for educating me in an area where i am weak and fleshing out tough conversations…which can be messy.

In my opinion, which may be flawed, i agree with you that the sometimes elitist attitude flown by some members of BP can turn me away…but even more distasteful (again, to me) are messy conversations where people are sounding out thoughts and others, instead of engaging those thoughts, start shouting SYSTEMIC RACISM!! MANSPLAINING!!! or my new favorite “SEEMS TO BE SEXIST!!!!”

I don’t see how “what is her expertise…” can be construed as a sexist dog whistle…and that is the crux of his post. I do alot of things i’m not qualified for, but i surround myself with talent…does Hardesty? or can i not ask that because i’m a man and she’s a woman? Maybe BP/JM is the secret sauce to Hardesty’s success in transpo, if so, lets hear it.

In all fairness, F*ck me…like i said above, i’m nobody and you are a contributor to this board. it’s your world not mine. but i appreciate BP as a crucible of concepts and ideas, not a place where people shout down others based on hunches about their intentions…i can get that agita elsewhere.

Caleb
Guest
Caleb

“you can’t really make good decisions about cycling til you’ve ridden many miles on skinny tires.”

As one who has ridden and repaired a huge variety of bicycles, I disagree that skinny tires are required, unless you simply mean skinny relative to automobile tires.

Steve Scarich
Guest
Steve Scarich

She is so clueless, that it laughable. This is one of the problems with ‘citizen legislatures’. It usually results in office-holders who have never held a meaningful private enterprise job. Am I wrong about any of the Portland City Council? In Bend, our Mayor’s administrative resume consists of nearly driving a major non-profit into bankruptcy. Hardesty does not understand the economics of very expensive real estate being used for, say, a farmer’s market. Now, I would love to see Downtown Portland become the peoples living room, but somebody has to pay for it.

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

I think Jonathan may have been a government censor in a past life.
🙂 Sorry JM but what you deleted was not offensive. Ride on!

J_R
Guest
J_R

It appears Hardesty is still not ready to endorse any meaningful increase in enforcement. She’s still reluctant to use cameras because there have been negative impacts on non-privileged people. She appears to support camera enforcement based on non-sworn personnel reviewing camera images, but even that’s not clear. As for her assertion that any patrol officer can cite for traffic offenses, that’s no help at all. I’ve seen blatant violations of traffic laws performed in front of numerous officers with NO action.

The interview does not encourage me to think we will have any improvement in the dismal safety performance of Portland’s transportation network.

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

Agree J_R. Hardesty is so committed to racial equity that it clouds her judgement on other issues. She really seems better fitted to being a community activist than someone in charge of a complex bureaucracy with multiple responsibilities and objectives.

I do like that picture of her on the bike though. Lookin’ good!

Kiel Johnson (Go By Bike)
Member

I want a commissioner who is committed to racial equity! And I hope she can infuse her community activism into PBOT. PBOT and the city will be better off because of it.

Clint Culpepper
Guest
Clint Culpepper

I think it’s terrible that you think a commitment to racial equity clouds her judgement on other issues. If you are committed to advocating for bikes, does that cloud your judgement on housing policy? Climate change? These are all pieces of environmental justice and it’s not possible to address only one part of the problem.

Tony Jordan (Contributor)
Subscriber

This is a gross comment and I am sad that (at least) 13 people have liked it and I feel it reflects poorly on the bicycle community.

Nadia Maxim
Guest
Nadia Maxim

Tony,
Your comment seems very hyperbolic. Of course racial equity is an important issue. It’s just that Hardesty can’t seem to focus on anything else which is a requirement for a city commissioner.
Ride on!

Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

@Tony Jordan (Contributor): I think it would be worth some discussion about why you found this comment so offensive. While I view it as an unfair criticism of Hardesty, there is no shortage of unfair comments about political leaders here, and I don’t see that as likely to change.

The comment comes on the heels of Hardesty’s PBOT rejecting bike lanes on Hawthorne in part for the stated reason of racial equity, which suggests a possible conflict between how her bureau interprets “equity” and the sort of progressive transportation policies that many here champion. It was a decision many readers were disappointed by.

So the comment is at least relevant to the current context. I can see that it probably encodes a different set of political priorities than you have, but then many messages here do that, so I suspect that isn’t it.

Can you be more specific about what about this comment in particular you found so gross, or why you feel it reflects on you in any way?

Michael Andersen
Subscriber

God forbid that someone who’s dedicated most of her life to fighting for racial equity one way or another and made it one of the core issues of her successful candidacy prioritize racial equity over other important values when they’re in conflict!

I don’t always agree with Hardesty, just as I didn’t always agree with Eudaly or Novick or Saltzman or Adams. But each of them had core issues, and the greatest thing about bikes is that they are useful on so many dimensions, including racial equity, affordability, climate change, public health, and Portland’s national/international identity. I wish our leaders *always* shared my exact priorities, but Hardesty’s rarely far from them. We as a city and we as biking believers could do a lot worse than her in general or her positions on racial equity in particular, IMO.

Jeff
Guest
Jeff

“greatest thing about bikes is that they are useful on so many dimensions, including racial equity”

I’ll be honest, and happy to be shown that this is in fact the case – but is biking truly useful for racial equity? The bike commuters in my building appear to be even less diverse than the admittedly non-diverse overall workforce in the building.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

In fact, the data supports the claim that the Traffic Division enforced traffic law without significant bias, whereas the regular police don’t, probably because they use traffic violations as a pretext to stop “suspicious” looking characters.

But it’s time to give up on this issue. Politics and resource limitations mean that there can be no meaningful progress on traffic safety in the foreseeable future. 60 to 90 traffic deaths annually is what we should expect moving forward.

eawriste
Guest
eawriste

Hey HK if you’re concerned about the consistent increasing trend in traffic deaths (we are at a record death toll at 57 since 1996), let’s persuade Hardesty that traffic cameras are the way to go. PBoT has reportedly been having issues with procurement, and it appears she is still lukewarm on the idea despite backing a bill to increase them.

In NYC “Enforcement by automated speed cameras in New York City has changed driver behavior significantly enough to reduce speeding by up to 60 percent.” There is also a city council law proposed to move all traffic enforcement from the NYPD to the DOT. I hope linking street design to enforcement and inevitable crashes (when designs are poor) is a fantastic step forward, and I hope Portland can do the same.

Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

Reduced speeding where? City wide? At the camera locations?

That 60% number is footnoted as coming from a 2013 report touting various safety improvements the city made. One page of the 50 page document discusses speed cameras, which notes that camera enforcement in NYC was set to begin “at the end of 2013” (i.e. after the report was written). In other words, that 60% figure is not backed by anything.

So while it seems entirely plausible that speeding would be reduced near speed cameras, the streets blog article does not actually support that with data. Would cameras be the most effective strategy for reducing injuries/fatalities? I don’t know. I think the problem is serious enough that we need to employ “both/and” thinking rather than “either/or”.

Therefore, I’ll help lobby for cameras if you help lobby for enforcement, though I don’t see either as particularly realistic options at the moment.

Alex
Guest
Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

Thanks for posting that link. It supports my argument that the Traffic Division’s stop data does not demonstrate bias as well as my explanation for why the regular police’s data generally does.

Alex
Guest
Alex

No it doesn’t.

“Rather than relying simply on census data, the bureau uses a complicated set of benchmarks to determine what outcomes they would expect to see in their stop data. The traffic division uses the demographics of people involved in injury-collisions, while the patrol division bases their benchmark on crime victimization data.” <- Police justification/working of the numbers.

“What does crime victimization data have to do with the number of drivers in the community?” asked Young. “(PPB) are simply fishing for benchmarks to justify disproportionate policing of Black people.”

Basically you are just taking the side of the cops and the article presents both what the cops argue, the first quoted paragraph, and I think the more accurate description of how they carefully choose metrics and justify their systemic racism. So while you may think it strengthens your argument, to me it just shows you are buying what they are selling wholesale.

Hello, Kitty
Guest
Hello, Kitty

The traffic division uses the demographics of people involved in injury-collisions

This is reasonable. Crashes are a good proxy for driving behavior. If whatever subgroup crashes a lot, it is likely they drive dangerously, and it follows that they’d get more tickets.

Read it again. The line about crime victimization specifically refers to the patrol division, not the traffic division. I have never suggested that the patrol division stats do not demonstrate bias.

It is ironic that Hardesty sees the patrol division as a suitable stand-in for the traffic division when it comes to traffic enforcement.

Phil M
Guest
Phil M

Nothing will ever get accomplished with Hardesty stonewalling everything in the name of racial equality. She needs to resign. Nobody wins here.

one
Guest

Nothing should get passed without an equity lens applied to it. Prove me wrong.

SolarEclipse
Guest
SolarEclipse

As long as an equity lens only considers factors such as economics, education, housing, etc. and not the color of one’s skin then absolutely apply an equity lens.

soren
Guest
soren

in oregon/portland/USA it is impossible to address economic, housing, and education inequality without also addressing racism and the culture of white privilege it maintains.

pruss2ny
Guest
pruss2ny

“people should do good….prove me wrong”

when we are trying to move forward, empty platitudes are useless and somewhat destructive because lines like “equity lens” don’t really mean anything concrete BUT can be used to frame almost any argument as beyond reproach.

“Nothing should get passed without an equity lens applied to it. Prove me wrong.”

–could you offer one (or 2 or 3) examples of something that shouldn’t get passed “without an equity lens” and describe what that lens would look like in your mind? Then people can engage…

Clint Culpepper
Guest
Clint Culpepper

Resign? Really?

Tony Jordan (Contributor)
Subscriber

This is a gross comment and I am sad that (at least) 13 people have liked it and I feel it reflects poorly on the bicycle community.

Phil M
Guest
Phil M

I am sad you feel we should all exist within an echo chamber and I feel it reflects poorly on the bicycle community.

Caleb
Guest
Caleb

Neither condoning nor opposing Tony’s comment, I don’t believe his comment indicates he feels any particular way about echo chambers. If he made the same comment responding to someone promoting murder, you likely wouldn’t jump to the conclusion he wants us in an echo chamber. Judging by the post about BP comments and his comments there, I suspect a dynamic similar to that hypothetical is behind his comment here.

207bikes
Guest
207bikes

If she hasn’t done her “really deep dive into PBOT’s budget requests,” what exactly has she been doing? Obtaining that purview seems like the top priority in running a bureau. This response, like many above, reads like more deflection, laissez faire fallacies and empty platitudes from city hall.

David Hampsten
Guest
David Hampsten

“…But here’s the reality: The reality is that with Vision Zero, we have to include new crossings, we have to improve lighting, and we have to slow vehicles down. And if we don’t get vehicles to slow down, we will continue to have these deaths at the hands of vehicles. What I know is that at the end of the day, vehicles have a much higher responsibility. Because if you hit a person, the harm that you’re going to do, could lead to death. So we clearly need more aggressive tools to ensure that we’re slowing down automobiles as they drive through very dense urban communities.”

It’s those darn irresponsible vehicles and their hands. IMO, we ought to lock up all vehicles in prison and throw away the key.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

I would never let my vehicle get its hands on its own key. Who knows what its capable of? It might run for mayor!

JR
Guest
JR

I like to bike through this city and I generally find it easy to get to places on Hawthorne from where I live a couple miles away. I’m not sure biking ON Hawthorne is the biggest issue we face now. I agree with the commissioner on bold visions for car-free areas and transit priority. These are policy winners in my book. I know this is a pretty bike-saturated culture I’m commenting in, but take it as a perspective from someone who uses transit and walks much more than biking.

eawriste
Guest
eawriste

Why do you think you take transit and walk more than biking? Why do you think only 5% of people bike (down from 8% a decade ago)?

Steve Scarich
Guest
Steve Scarich

I-5 question. Isn’t any decision on widening I-5 part of the desire to speed up truck travel on I-5? I mean, much of the discussion about the Interstate Bridge is the need to get freight up and down the West Coast. Do the Feds have any say in the Rose Quarter discussion?

mark smith
Guest
mark smith

If you drive a truck, most of your “waiting” is at the shipper/receiver. The part in between in a minor inconvenience… There is no way to “speed up” freight traffic without a)making a freight lane (never going to happen) or setting up a toll lane. ODOT, as useless as they are, apparently can’t look around the country and do a single toll lane. It’s done all over the place and works just fine…but you know..ODOT.

mark smith
Guest
mark smith

Let me say first, I like Hardesty. We don’t always agree on the actions she takes, but she isn’t afraid and doesn’t owe some fatcat anything. That said, first the city council needs to promote getting out of this forced lockdown mentality. The economy is literally roaring except for a few sectors. It’s the public sector (aka schools/Government) that have been busy dragging down the economy.

Also, why in the world does a whole building need to be “commercial” or “residential” or a whole floor for that matter? It’s time to think different. There is/will be a lot of empty commercial space. Make it eligible for residential. Then some will say “oh, but it needs” (insert some code in here)….well let’s see, so people can be in the space but not sleep in the space? Well, that’s stupid. Fix that. Get people out of their hiding mentality. Start now. Or yeah, you will be broke and it’s YOUR fault. There is plenty of housing, it just doesn’t say “ridge cliff luxury apartments” on the front. Start incentivizing hotels to house people. There are lots of empty hotel rooms.

Nobody is coming to save you and shower you with dollars for years to come because Oregon decided to overdo it. The real problem here is lockdown Kate. The economy is doing great, the stock market is flying, people are making lot’s of money around the country…except for a few small pockets in Oregon. Why is that? Well…politicians and lockdown (build a bigger I5) Kate.

This lockdown has not been a burden on white tech workers but a massive blow to people of color in the hospitality industry, school support staff…just to name a few. Yeah, Black lives matter to the uber left in Oregon…but only if it means bringing my doordash…but you know..that pesky education thing…that pesky education thing… oh maybe part time school? That’s fine for the upper crust, one parent stays home..but in a working class home that means one parent loses income. But hey, the teachers get paid 100%….

The city council could be a united front to explain bluntly that people of color and poor people are largely hurting because the rich and the white decided to hide indoors. And now…suddenly there is no money to do anything…. But will they? Probably not…life behind a zoom screen in amazing…getting paid and all that…

In one sentence she says we need to look at doing a new bridge or messing around with I5, but in another she says there is no money for putting down Jersey barriers. See how that works? People will keep dying and only things that matters to the uber/white left will get fixed and the pandemic (at least in Oregon) will go on for years? How’s that vaccine coming? Oh, 3rd worst? Well, talk about that to. Stop worrying about potholes, that will get done to some degree.

Hardesty, Speak. And don’t stop speaking and don’t stop pushing this failed governor/government of Oregon when they ignore everyone but the white upper class. Let’s see if the government/tech class really thinks all lives matter. We can measure that by when small business is really allowed to go back to serving their customers for real.

Oh..what’s that? Sports opened up before restaurants could? Thanks lockdown Kate. Maybe the next governor of Oregon, Hardesty, can stop that nonsense.

Fred
Guest
Fred

See you on your bike, Mark.

Jim Jeffers
Guest
Jim Jeffers

We live on 25th and Yamhill and signed the petition for better Hawthorne. I feel we are nearby residents who could have answered PBOTs survey but must have missed the opportunity to contribute. I can say this though — every other day or so we are crossing Hawthorne at some point and all too often it ends up being near the Grand Central on 23rd. I am just extremely grateful there will be pedestrian friendly crosswalks there in addition a reduction of 4 to 2 lanes of active traffic. It is a scary place to cross and many many people are crossing there all the time! This will be a welcome improvement but it’s a missed opportunity for our neighborhood and community.

Mike Owens
Guest
Mike Owens

Great job Jonathan. I like the commish a lot. But she doesn’t get it. I think you do, and your questions and discussion show that.

Look, we have 9 years to cut our emissions in half. We can’t have spotty car free areas. We can’t have each neighborhood bitch for years and redo studies. The time for studies is now past. We have examples. Real cities, in real places with real people that demonstrate the success or failure of transportation solutions. Community activism needs to take a back seat to collectivity, and put NIMBY in the trash heap.

Our problems are made up. We can take on a 10 year massive infrastructure plan and fund it with municipal green bonds. This street by street debating needs to be over. First principles go first: does this plan meet our 10 year emissions goals: yes or no. All other concerns are lower in priority. Voting and equity and economics are lower in priority (not unimportant, lesser in priority)

Grab the best from the best cities, bring them here and spend a year putting together the plan, funding. That is what a PBOT commissioner must do in 2021.

Jeff
Guest
Jeff

With all of the funding deficiencies (and while I don’t agree with Hardesty, she’s absolutely right to point out these will get even larger in the next 2 years), do you honestly think a majority of Portland voters would want municipal green bonds to be the priority? I just don’t thinkt hat’s going to be the case.