6/20: Hello readers and friends. I am having my second (of two) total knee replacement surgeries today so I'll be out of commission for a bit while I recover. Please be patient while I get back to full health. I hope to be back to posting as soon as I can. I look forward to getting back out there. 🙏. - Jonathan Maus, BikePortland Publisher and Editor
Biking through the Rijksmuseum hall A mass of kids and their bikes after school.Kids sharing a bike.
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.
Ok, I think this is going to be my last story about The Netherlands for now. I really loved it, especially Amsterdam, as I’m sure is evident from my stories this week, but I think I’ve exhausted my capacity to write about this particular country for the time being. Plus, I’ve just arrived in Copenhagen, so I should probably try to stop thinking about Amsterdam for a while and pay attention to my surroundings here.
In the articles I’ve written from Utrecht and Amsterdam, I discussed several topics about the infrastructure (and also recounted my trouble with the law). But I realized I haven’t really written about my actual experience on a bike! So, here’s what I thought about the brass tacks of the Dutch bicycling experience.
The rain was no deterrent for Amsterdam’s cyclists.One way of carrying your dogs…And another!
The bike itself
With the exception of my new electric bike, I’ve only ridden hybrid bikes with at least seven speeds since I stopped using training wheels. I like to maintain a relatively upright posture, but not so much that I feel like Miss Gulch in The Wizard of Oz. That’s sort of how I felt riding the Dutch-style bikes I rented in The Netherlands, and it took some getting used to — especially the braking system.
The rental shop offered bikes with hand brakes for a few more Euros, but I wanted to see if I could figure out the coaster brakes, so I opted for the cheaper one. At first, this was difficult, and along with attracting the attention of law enforcement, I also almost crashed into a parked car and several other things because I forgot how to stop. But once I got used to it, I realized I actually like this way of braking for traveling around flat areas.
I am prone to overusing my front brake while biking in Portland because I’m using my right hand to take photos, which is really not ideal. With coaster brakes, you can use your hands a lot more freely without risking flipping over the handlebars. Now, I don’t think this would work for me in places where you need to climb up and down hills any steeper than a canal bridge (yes, fixie people, I know!), but in Amsterdam it makes complete sense.
I think it’s kind of old-fashioned to sit completely upright on a bike (these bikes are often referred to as ‘omafiets,’ or ‘grandma bikes’), but the Dutch are able to pull it off with style. This posture definitely allows you to dress in more restrictive clothing while biking, so it’s perfect for people commuting to work.
Ultimately, this style of bike is perfect for flat Amsterdam, but there’s a reason people in Portland have their preferred alternatives. I don’t hate it, though!
In Utrecht a man who wanted to pass me on a bike path gently pushed me out of his way without saying a word… it was strange!
Locking up
Most Dutch bikes utilize a multi-prong locking system. The ring lock (a.k.a wheel lock) element enables you to lock just your back wheel, preventing people from quickly riding off with it when you just want to leave it alone for a little bit or can’t find anything to lock it to (a common problem with the volume of bikes in the country). For more security, you can use a chain bike lock that’s mounted to the bike to lock it to a rack.
Locals will tell you there’s a huge problem with bike theft in Amsterdam, but there are so many bikes in the city that if someone wants to steal one, they’re not going to take it if they can’t quickly ride away on it. And I must say that with the number of expensive Urban Arrows and VanMoofs I saw parked on the streets late at night, people must either feel confident it won’t get stolen or be willing to buy a new one if it does.
Ultimately, I’m probably just going to keep using my u-lock in Portland — I’m too paranoid to leave my bike untethered to an immovable object. But for some added security, maybe the ring lock method should get some traction in the U.S.?
The bike culture
I was a bit afraid I would stick out like a sore thumb in Europe with my American biking habits, but I think I managed to figure out how to roll with the crowd pretty easily. The only somewhat negative interaction I had, other than my conversation with the cops, was in Utrecht when a man who wanted to pass me on a bike path gently pushed me out of his way without saying a word. I didn’t fall over and it didn’t even seem mean-spirited, but it was strange!
Otherwise, people used their bells to communicate, which is something I think we ought to more fully embrace in the U.S. The only problem is that with all the car traffic in Portland, it can be hard to hear a bell ringing.
It was great to see people of all ages riding their bikes, looking relaxed instead of constantly stressed about safety. And I don’t think I saw a single soul wearing a helmet — it’s not necessary!
So, onwards I go on my journey. Thanks for reading my dispatches so far, and hopefully you don’t get tired of them, because I plan to keep them coming.
Portland began building bike infrastructure in earnest in 1980. Prior to that year, the city’s entire network of bikeways amounted to just 0.1 miles of bike lanes and 8.3 miles of off-street paths. But Portland really began its steady march toward the title of America’s Bicycle Capital in 1980.
That year we nearly quadrupled the size of our bike network by adding 3 miles of neighborhood greenways, 5 miles of bike lanes and 15 miles of paths. Today we have about 433 miles of bikeways in the city — and that’s less than half of 1,032 total miles planned.
These numbers are fun, but they mean more as we give them context. At Tuesday’s meeting of the Portland Bureau of Transportation Bicycle Advisory Committee, we learned interesting new context that gives us a better sense for the progress we’ve made, how far we’ve got to go, and which parts of town are faring the best (and worst).
PBOT Bike Coordinator Roger Geller (who’s worked in the city’s bike program since 1994) shared a table titled, “Portland’s bikeway network status by status and facility type by sextant of the city.” As you can see in the map above, Geller took some creative liberty with the borders and actually split his data into seven sections (not six). The “East Portand” zone is I-205 and everthing east of it and he creates “Inner” northeast and southeast.
(Source: City of Portland)
The map graphic at the top of this post was made with numbers from the table above. The top section of the table lists the active, funded, recommended, and total bikeway miles for each part of the city.
Who would have guessed that East Portland would come out on top with 54% of its total recommended bikeway network already built? This is a strong validation of how the City of Portland has made amazing strides in that area over the past 15 years. (The lack of attention on east Portland became a major political hot-spot for PBOT in the 2008 mayoral election between then PBOT Commissioner Sam Adams and Sho Dozono. Transportation and bicycling was Adams’ top issue and Dozono, an east Portland resident, popularized the idea that bike projects in the central city and inner neighborhoods were being built at the expense of people who lived at the city’s eastern edges.)
Also revealing is the lower section of data that breaks down the bikeway miles by facility type, and then adds color to show which type of bikeway is most prominent in each area — dark green is the highest number and red is the lowest. “Conventional bike lanes” (paint-only, with no buffer) dominate in East Portland, whereas neighborhood greenways dominate in Inner Southeast and Inner Northeast.
These numbers are likely to fuel the ire of southwest Portland advocates (already some of sauciest folks in town when it comes to haranguing PBOT), who will likely be frustrated that in 2023 we have only built 29% of the planned bikeways in that area.
Speaking of 2023, we’re just seven short years away from the target date of the 2030 Bicycle Plan, which says we’re supposed to have a network that’s complete and robust enough to entice 25% of all trips to be made by bike. How can we use these numbers to help us reach that goal? What else jumps out at you from this data?
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.
They told me they were fining me for riding my bike illegally.
People who visit Amsterdam often discuss the dangers people face while attempting to walk on the bike-filled streets. I think this is a bit exaggerated, especially by Americans who are unfazed by masses of cars and not used to seeing so many people biking at once, so I’ll usually play devil’s advocate to that claim and say something about the comparative danger of getting hit by someone riding a bike versus someone driving a car. I also don’t necessarily fault Dutch bicyclists for being a little annoyed when a tourist — especially one who just spent a couple hours smoking in a coffee shop — walks right through their path.
I walked a lot while I was there, and did have a couple of close calls with people on bikes even though I was paying very close attention to the traffic flow (and was fully lucid!). My opinion is generally that whoever is using the larger and more powerful vehicle bears the majority of the responsibility for making sure more vulnerable road users are safe. In these situations, though, I think I probably earned the insults I received when someone on a bike had to swerve to avoid me. (This only happened once, and they spoke Dutch, so I remain blissfully ignorant to what was said.)
However, there’s an art to walking in Amsterdam, and I think the city could probably stand to make it a little more clear to visitors using all modes of transportation how to abide by it. They have made an effort to create spaces where pedestrians have full reign — in most of the public plazas I wrote about earlier, people on bikes are required to dismount and walk — but the signs marking these spaces are 1) not always very conspicuous and 2) in Dutch. And I learned the risks of not heeding these signs the hard way.
Ummmm.This one is easier to understand.
How I almost went to jail
The police were skeptical when I told them I didn’t know this was a pedestrian-only area.
Like I said, I did a lot of walking in Amsterdam, but of course I rode a bike as well — and my experience wasn’t without snags. About two minutes after I picked up my rental bike from a shop in Rembrandtplein, a touristy area in the city center, I was apprehended by two police officers who saw me trying to bike through what was evidently a pedestrian-only area. (I say tried, because I was having a hard time with the coaster brake on my bike and almost fell on a tram track.) Since I picked up my bike from a shop in the middle of this street, I missed the sign at the entrance that signaled these rules.
They yelled something in Dutch, and at first I didn’t know who they were talking to or what they were saying, but they caught up to me and told me to step aside and hand over my passport. I asked why, and after some back and forth, they told me they were fining me for riding my bike illegally.
I was a little agitated, but I tried to keep calm. They took down my information, including the address of my hostel, saying if I didn’t give it to them they’d have to take me to jail. Now, I figured this was an exaggeration, but also knew that if I was really sent to Dutch jail for riding a bike in a pedestrian zone at least I wouldn’t have to worry about getting fired from my job at BikePortland. Still, it would be kind of annoying, so I tried to avoid it.
For some reason, the police were skeptical when I told them I didn’t know this was a pedestrian-only area: it seemed like they thought I was purposely trying to hurt people walking in the street. In Portland, I pride myself on being able to navigate conflict with people walking, even when I occasionally have to ride on the sidewalks, so I didn’t like the accusation that I am inconsiderate of pedestrians!
I kept stressing my ignorance and it seemed like they believed me in the end. At least, they didn’t give me a fine — though, come to think of it, maybe I’ll receive a bill from my hostel in a couple weeks.
I was surprised by how seriously the police took my affront, and even a little impressed they took pedestrian safety so seriously. For the rest of the day, I biked very timidly, dismounting whenever I didn’t see another person on a bike going my same direction, or a clear sign that it was okay for me to be in the area. I don’t think this behavior made pedestrians any safer, but it did make it more difficult for me to get around.
I don’t have a problem with areas only for pedestrians, especially in a place like Amsterdam where there are so many cyclists, but there must be a better way to manage the biker/walker relationship beyond jail threats and fines. Here’s my thought: the fewer cars on the streets, the more room there would be for people using all modes of active transportation to coexist. They’re doing a pretty good job of this in Amsterdam, but it could be better.
Finally, I will admit that my English-speaking arrogance is partly to blame: I should’ve learned more Dutch before traveling to The Netherlands. That wouldn’t have hurt, either.
Primary Responsibilities
Organize and successfully execute the annual season of youth bike camps in Washington County, meeting the purpose and major goals of the program as stated in the governing policy.
Grow and improve the program in size, scope, and quality.
Manage seasonal staff.
Time Frame: February – September each year.
These responsibilities include but are not limited to:
Determine camp dates and locations. Note: This task should be completed by mid-March to allow for development of advertising materials, scheduling instructors, and assure we have venues locked down, etc.
Recruit, interview, hire instructors at pay ranges approved by the ED, along with background checks, CIT training or verified training
Assure instructors are trained. Set up pre-camp dinner, training. This includes the company policies as well as safe cycling skills.
Secure suitable venues.
Work with the ED to develop and meet budgets.
Monitor and ensure camps are operating well.
Develop an Instructor Reference Book with games, activities, maps/routes around each venue, etc. for use in future years.
Other tasks as needed to insure successful camps.
Responsibilities for this position do not include:
Being a Camp Instructor- that is a separate job.
Procuring liability Insurance. This is the responsibility of WashCo Bikes.
Back office duties- managing registration, payments, communication with parents, printing and copying,etc.
Current program size: 8 weeks – number of bike camps from late June through August. Two- three age groups in each camp 125-175 campers per summer 4-6 paid/volunteer instructors per week.
This position reports to the Executive Director.
Pay Range: $18-$20 per hour. Can be a fixed sum contract (based on an estimated 150 hours per season) payable at pre-agreed upon milestones; or a monthly based on fixed number of months and hours.
How to Apply
Send, a letter of interest and current resume to
info@washcobikes.org
One it has been reviewed you will be contacted to set up an interview.
Concept drawing from TriMet shows new plaza and housing development (at right) coming to Hollywood Transit Center. View is looking south toward I-84 from NE Halsey.
Existing site looking southeast. That’s NE Halsey St on the bottom.
TriMet is ready to move into final design of their plan to create a new Hollywood Transit Center. Project staff from the agency attended the City of Portland Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) Tuesday night to present the final conceptual plans after over a year of wrangling with the group over how the project would impact bicycle riders, walkers, and transit users.
The HollywoodHUB project is a partnership between TriMet and BRIDGE Housing that will build a 220-unit affordable housing complex on the parcel of land bordered by Northeast Halsey, I-84 and two existing large retail buildings (24 Hour Fitness and Target) between NE 41st and 42nd. The land is currently used for several bus stops and a ramp and stairs that connect to a bridge over I-84 and the Hollywood Transit Center MAX light rail station.
TriMet’s challenge was to fit necessary right-of-way and a new housing development into a relatively small site that will mix many different types of users. The BAC has been particularly interested in this project because NE 42nd is a major north-south bicycle route. The carfree, bicycle and pedestrian bridge over I-84 that runs through the site is an important connection between the Hollywood and Laurelhurst neighborhoods.
Existing user circulationRevised user circulationStair/ramp sectionsProject footprintSite overviewPresentation slides from the meeting. (Source: TriMet)
In our story on this project back in September we detailed major concerns with this project from bicycle advocates and BAC members. On Tuesday, TriMet Project Manager Catherine Sherraden spoke to those concerns as she shared new design drawings and laid out what the community can expect when construction starts in January 2024.
According to Sherraden project will include:
two new crosswalks on NE Halsey at 41st,
bike parking via staple racks in the new plaza and an indoor facility accessible with a TriMet Hop card,
a new ramp from the I-84 bridge to Halsey that will have two sharp turns instead of seven,
moving two bus stops (that serve lines 75,77, and 66) out onto Halsey and 42nd,
a 20-foot wide connection to the future Sullivan’s Gulch Trail path (which has been on pause for years),
and a new dedicated traffic signal to help bikers and walkers cross Halsey at 42nd.
The ramp design has been a major sticking point for the BAC. TriMet says the new one will be 11-feet wide — about twice the width of the current one. Combined with fewer switchbacks, it should be much easier to bike through this plaza without dismounting once the project is complete. For people that don’t want to bike on the ramps, there will be wide wheel ramps on the stairs. It’s important to keep in mind that the entire plaza zone from the I-84 bridge to Halsey will be a shared environment where bicycle riders must be cautious of other people and be ready to dismount if necessary.
BAC Member David Stein has repeatedly told TriMet about his concerns.
“The transportation design elements of the project seem like they’re not serving anyone that well,” he told Sherraden on Tuesday. Here’s more from Stein:
“If you’re taking transit, you’re having to walk much further [to the new bus stops]. If you have a mobility device or some kind of mobility impairment, it’s going to still be challenging with an 8% grade. I know I’ve written on the Tilikum Crossing which is a 5% grade and that’s quite a bit, so I can’t imagine if I was in a wheelchair having to to navigate that. As far as biking. The switchbacks are pretty devastating. And then the four-foot bike lanes on 42nd — I’ve ridden on 42nd and a four-foot space is so uncomfortable and just really doesn’t do much to encourage biking.”
“The fact of the matter is, there simply is not a lot of space. We just don’t have a lot of room,” Sherradan replied. “Within those real constraints, we strove to make a facility that would work as well as it could for all of our users. So that’s the design we have. I wish we had a different scale of project and we had more room in all the directions. But we just don’t.”
When the bike figure overlaps with the bus in your cross-section, that’s a problem. (Source: TriMet)
There was an interesting exchange at Tuesday’s meeting about those narrow, four-foot wide bike lanes proposed for NE 42nd Ave (above). Many attendees expressed concern about them. When asked why they weren’t any wider, Sherraden said the lane widths on the road are out of their jurisdiction and any changes would be PBOT’s responsibility. Hearing that, BAC members turned to PBOT Bike Coordinator and BAC liaison Roger Geller. “It’s about a 29-foot road, so any changes would require either a major operational change — like turning it into a one-way [for drivers] or major construction [to widen the road],” Geller said.
And with that, a few BAC members volunteered to write a letter that will recommend PBOT consider a design change to 42nd that would make it possible to create more cycling space (we’ll share the letter when it’s done).
In the end, Stein and other members of the BAC seemed resigned. While the project isn’t perfect, TriMet listened and made some changes based on their input. An online feedback page used by BAC members included this comment from someone who rides an adaptive tricycle: “It is impossible to cross I-84 with existing conditions. While the switchbacks will make it extremely difficult, it will now at least be possible.”
TriMet will now finalize the design and move into permitting for the project in the coming months. Construction is expected to start in early 2024. The Hollywood Transit Center and the NE 42nd Avenue bike route will remain open throughout construction.
CORRECTION, 1:01 pm: The original version of this story referred to narrow bike lanes on NE Halsey. That was a mistake. The exchange about narrow bike lanes was about NE 42nd Ave. I regret any confusion.
Current conditions outside Powell Butte Elementary School.
The Oregon Department of Transportation just announced a list of 26 projects that have been awarded funding through the state’s Safe Routes to School program. A total of $32.4 million in construction projects will be spread statewide. The sole City of Portland project to make the cut was a $1.9 million plan to build sidewalks, crosswalks, and buffered bicycle lanes for Powell Butte Elementary School on SE 174th Avenue.
Region 1 (where Portland is located) received $8.5 million in this round of grants. Funding for bike lanes, sidewalks, and safer crossings are also on their way to Fairview Elementary School in east Multnomah County, as well as new lighting on a major street near Witch Hazel Elementary School in Hillsboro.
All the awards went to Title 1 schools where 40% or more of the student population is low-income. These capital construction grants are not to be confused with a separate pot of funding for Safe Routes educational programs which were announced back in June.
According to ODOT, demand for these funds far outstripped available funds: They received 83 project applications for a total requested funding amount of $80 million.
Safer routes for students on one hand, more freeway traffic on the other.
In a case of one step forward and two steps back, also today the Oregon Transportation Commission voted unanimously to approve $42.7 million in additional funding for the I-5 Rose Quarter project — despite the fact that it’s widely opposed and mired in controversy and lawsuits. With no debate or discussion, OTC members voted to amend the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program so that the I-5 Rose Quarter project budget could increase from $175,391,997 to $218,091,997. The new funding will be used for design and engineering work as project leaders tee up the first phases of construction.
These two funding announcements make ODOT’s priorities abundantly clear and they validate the growing narrative from critics that if the OTC and ODOT really cared about Oregonians and traffic safety, they would invest much more into non-freeway projects.
— Browse the complete list of Safe Routes to School grants below:
Vivian Satterfield in 2021. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Starting February 1st, the City of Portland will have a new chief sustainability officer and the person hired for the role might be familiar to many BikePortland readers. It’s Vivian Satterfield, a transportation and environmental justice activist who previously worked at nonprofits Verde NW and OPAL Environmental Justice Oregon.
You might also recall Satterfield from our podcast interview with her in October 2021. To have someone like Satterfield in this key role guiding the City of Portland’s strategy to battle climate change and reduce carbon emissions is a very promising bit of news.
According to the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability the chief sustainability officer is responsible for Portland’s climate action programs. The job description specifically noted that her role would include, “Reducing carbon emissions from buildings and the transportation sector,” and “Collaborating with land use and transportation planning programs to integrate climate and sustainability priorities into other citywide plans and initiatives.” Given her experience on transportation issues and existing relationships with Bureau of Transportation staff, Satterfield is likely to hit the ground running at time when we desperately need action and progress on these fronts.
And for what it’s worth, Satterfield is also an everyday rider who gets to work on an electric bike.
Here’s to hoping she kicks Portland’s transportation-related climate change policies and projects into high gear! Congrats Vivian!
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.
She said something along the lines of: “Amsterdam is a lot like Portland,” and then, whispered: “except for the homeless people.”
Could Portland have nice, well-maintained public spaces like the Dutch do? In the comments of the story I wrote yesterday about the bounty of “third places” in The Netherlands, someone said it wouldn’t be feasible: any space offered to Portland’s public free of charge would soon be overrun with trash and needles. (This point is brought up a lot when we talk about creating more public amenities in Portland.)
Now, I might not feel like the comments on yesterday’s post warranted a story of their own, but this discussion emphasized another experience I had a few days ago. I was briefly chatting with an American woman in Amsterdam who lived in Portland at some point recently, and when we discovered our mutual connection, she said something along the lines of: “Amsterdam is a lot like Portland,” and then whispered: “except for the homeless people.”
I posted this anecdote almost verbatim on Twitter and it got more attention that I expected. Some people chimed in with their opinions on why she would say something like this. Now, I don’t want to single this woman out specifically — I’m sure other people have made the same comparison, and I have no idea what her relationship to Portland’s homeless population is — but I do think it’s worth looking at why Portland has a far more visible problem with homelessness (and things typically associated with homelessness, like public drug use) than Amsterdam does.
The main source of litter on Amsterdam’s streets seemed to be Christmas trees waiting for pickup.
It’s not a value judgment to say that you don’t see trash and needles in The Netherlands to the same extent that you do in Portland. And it didn’t take me long to figure out why: dealing with trash is built into the city’s DNA. Unlike in Portland, there are public trash cans everywhere in Amsterdam. If you need a place to put your garbage while walking around the city, you don’t have to hope someone left their trash bin out in their driveway and won’t yell at you for using it. You can simply toss it in one of the many facilities available for everyone to use.
Let’s talk needles, then. The existence of a sufficient needle exchange program in Portland has been limited by people’s concerns that the availability of a place to dispose of needles and syringes will encourage drug use, (despite no evidence to support that idea) so there simply aren’t very many places for people to dispose of them. In comparison, Amsterdam created the first needle and syringe exchange program in the 1980s to good effect, and there are several options available for people who want to dispose of their used needles now. (Thanks to government efforts, they also don’t have an ongoing opioid epidemic like we do in the U.S.)
And these public facilities are just additions to the social safety network already present in western European countries (and many other places outside of the United States), which gives people access to healthcare, education and housing subsidies.
This isn’t to say the system works perfectly. The rising cost of living in The Netherlands has made way for a resurgence of a squatting movement that first took off in the 1960s within Amsterdam’s student population. But compared to the U.S., Dutch residents have a lot more resources at their disposal, and this includes public playgrounds and carfree spaces.
Without a government willing to provide basic resources for its residents, it will be a lot more difficult to see Dutch infrastructure in the United States. This much is clear just by looking at the way Amsterdam deals with its trash.
Chris Warner in 2019. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Chris Warner has left his post as the director of the Portland Bureau of Transportation, a position he has held since May 2019. Warner has taken a job with new Oregon Governor Tina Kotek and will serve as her deputy chief of staff of public administration. In an email to PBOT staff this morning newly named PBOT Commissioner Mingus Mapps said this was “an unexpected transition” but that he’s “thrilled” for Warner’s new role.
In her announcement, Gov. Kotek said Warner will, “coordinate activities and oversee the new office’s efforts to better align the Governor’s office management and oversight of agencies and the policies they manage.”
Warner was named PBOT director in May 2019 and was interim director for about one year prior to that. This change isn’t all that surprising given that PBOT has a new commissioner-in-charge (Mingus Mapps) and because the City of Portland is just two years away from a massive overhaul of its form of government that is likely to bring sweeping changes to how bureaus are run.
Tara Wasiak named interim director. (Photo: PBOT)
Salem political circles will be familiar territory for Warner. His wife, Barbara Smith Warner served as an Oregon State Representative (for district 45) from 2014 to 2022. Prior to his job at PBOT, Chris Warner was a policy advisory for Governor Ted Kulongoski, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, U.S. Representative Peter DeFazio, and most recently he was chief of staff for former Portland City Commissioner Steve Novick.
PBOT Deputy Director Tara Wasiak will step into an interim role while a national search is conducted for Warner’s replacement. Wasiak was in charge of PBOT’s Maintenance Operations group before she became deputy director.
It’s unclear whether the City of Portland will launch an immediate search for a new PBOT director given the lame duck status of our current government. The fact that we’re less than two years away from implementing the changes brought on by charter reform, we might see an extended run from Wasiak while the dust settles at City Hall.
Warner’s tenure as PBOT leader was defined by the racial justice protests and the COVID-19 pandemic. Warner once said equity was PBOT’s “north star” and in June 2020 in the heat of protest and outcry over the killing of George Floyd in Minnesota, he vowed to make the agency more inclusive and “anti-racist.” That commitment led to PBOT staff trainings, a re-evaluation of all policies, a plan to “assess and address infrastructure priorities with Black-serving organizations, and other promises.
Warner in 2019. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
When Warner had the opportunity to influence a project on the commercial section of SE Hawthorne Boulevard in May 2021, he surprised many Portlanders by pushing through a design option that favored wider driving lanes and crossing improvements instead of bike lanes. Warner and PBOT (in a decision set in motion by former City Commissioner Chloe Eudaly) claimed the addition of bike lanes would be bad for climate change and racial equity because it would slow down bus service and require more driving trips from Black and other people of color who live in east Portland. That decision was “disappointing” to PBOT’s own Bicycle Advisory Committee, was called a “huge missed opportunity” by a notable member of the Portland Planning Commission, and was part of the rationale for a pending lawsuit against the City of Portland that alleges they have not complied with a state law that requires bicycle lanes on major road projects.
The rate of bicycle ridership in Portland continued to stagnate and fall during Warner’s tenure at PBOT, while the number of cars and drivers on our roads has increased. In March 2021 the Portland Planning Commission wrote a letter to Warner outlining their concerns that PBOT wasn’t doing enough to boost bicycling and limit car use. As more drivers have hit the roads and PBOT has failed to bolster enforcement capabilities, the number of fatal collisions is at all-time highs and the perception of safety on our streets is at all-time lows.
In February 2021 Warner dissolved the city’s Vision Zero Task Force and promised a new multi-pronged engagement plan that would include a “BIPOC-centered education and outreach” strategy, collaboration with Metro and Multnomah County, an outreach and marketing plan for automated enforcement, and a new informational dashboard to help inform the public on progress. The dashboard was released two months later.
Warner’s most significant legacy might be the development of the Healthy Business program, which awards permits to businesses to use more street space and public-right-of-way for outdoor dining. That program emerged in May 2020 as an emergency measure to keep businesses afloat when COVID-19 health restrictions prevented indoor dining and it grew to include street plazas as well. PBOT has since made it a permanent policy and it will lead to more carfree spaces citywide.
UPDATE, 12:43 pm: Here’s the announcement from Commissioner Mapps sent to all PBOT staff this morning via email (it also appears to be his first communication with them since taking over the bureau):
Greetings, Portland Bureau of Transportation staff; my name is Mingus Mapps, as you have likely heard I am the new Commissioner-in-Charge of PBOT. I am honored to serve with you and continue the great work that PBOT has been doing. As PBOT Commissioner, I look forward to improving livability throughout the city, increasing the safety and accessibility of our transportation system, and furthering climate change initiatives while addressing the bureau’s structural budget challenges.
With the shift towards building a Public Works department with Environmental Services and Water, there are new opportunities to elevate the innovative efforts from the three bureaus in the areas of procurement, asset and data management, equity and more. We can do big things together and by working in concert with our regional partners this year.
Last night, Governor Kotek announced that she will be appointing Director Chris Warner to her administration as Deputy Chief of Staff of Public Administration. It’s fantastic news for the future of state service delivery to have such an experienced leader in this new role.
This is certainly an unexpected transition and I am sad to see Director Warner leave PBOT and the City of Portland, but at the same time I am thrilled that he will be joining Governor Kotek’s team. In the immediate term, I am appointing PBOT’s deputy director Tara Wasiak as the interim director while we conduct a competitive process to select a permanent director this year. I and PBOT leadership are committed to a smooth transition and ensuring a stable environment for employees.
One of my regular practices as Commissioner-in-Charge is to host employee town halls so that I can engage with bureau staff directly. My kickoff town hall is not yet scheduled, but when it is you will be the first to know. I hope to meet many of you there.
Thank you for your service to our community. I look forward to working with you!
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.
Yesterday I wrote about Amsterdam’s effort to replace on-street car parking spots with urban greenery and bike parking, an initiative partly meant to create more public spaces in the city for people to enjoy. And as I pointed out in that story, residents of Amsterdam’s city center are not necessarily wanting for urban parks as it is: it seems like everywhere you turn, there is some kind of carfree public plaza for people to enjoy.
People in the U.S. have been yearning for these types of public spaces lately. The term “third places” went viral on TikTok a few months ago, popularizing the concept of a place outside the home or workplace where you can just sit and relax without the pressure of needing to buy something.
And when you look around, it’s true: we don’t have very many of these in most cities in the United States, including in Portland. Yes, Portland has several gorgeous, large parks that I wouldn’t trade for the world. But compared to what you’ll come upon in Amsterdam, these places are few and far between. (Although thanks in part to former Portland Bureau of Transportation Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty’s efforts and a federal funding boost, this could change soon.)
A dog park and playground in Utrecht.A playground in Amsterdam.Kids can play hopscotch in this carfree public plaza in Amsterdam.Your “third places” don’t have to pay homage to famous artists like Rembrandtplein in Amsterdam, but they can!Another public plaza in Amsterdam.This play structure in Amsterdam is right outside a school, but it’s open during other times for public use.
The presence of all these spaces in The Netherlands also makes it much more pleasurable for city residents to live in very dense housing without room for individual backyards and gardens. Who needs a lawn to water when the city will do it for you at the park next door? So, here are some photos of my favorite public plazas and playgrounds I came upon while wandering around Utrecht and Amsterdam in the past several days. You’ll notice that many of them aren’t very big (though some are) — abundance is more important than size.
I hope you’re enjoying these dispatches. I’ve seen and experienced so much it’s challenging to condense it all and find the most post-able chunks. Stay tuned for a funny story where I was stopped by a police officer for riding in a pedestrian-only zone (and other innocent mishaps).
Looking east on NE Fremont at Alameda. (Photos/video: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
A few weeks ago, the long, sordid tale of the traffic diverter on NE Fremont and Alameda came to an end (or at least a new chapter began) when the Portland Bureau of Transportation was finally able to get it in the ground.
With installation of plastic curbs and (all too) flexible posts, along with new signage, the new diverter and crossing treatment now (mostly) prevents drivers from using Alameda as much as they used to. This is important because Alameda (and NE 37th to the north) is a vital, north-south neighborhood greenway where bicycle users are supposed to feel safe and welcome. The diverter (in theory at least) prevents drivers from crossing Fremont on Alameda and prevents them from turning left from either street. One of the main goals of the project was to reduce car user volumes on Alameda, but other positive impacts of the new treatment are likely to be slower driving speeds and more courteous car use in general.
I spent about 30 minutes at the location this morning observing traffic. What I noticed was a very busy intersection with a lot of walkers, runners and bikers — not to mention a relatively high volume of car users on Fremont. In the time I was there, only one person rammed over the plastic curbs and wands — the driver of a large truck going south on Alameda selfishly tore through the intersection and I was startled by the loud “boom” of the wand hitting the truck’s grill.
(Check out the full photo gallery and watch the video below.)
Besides that one jerk, compliance by drivers when walker or bikers were present was really good. These installations create a perception that the road is narrower and that drivers need to reduce their speed and use caution at the intersection.
I also saw the Alameda Elementary School bike bus come through. This project has had a major benefit for the 100 or so students and volunteers who follow Sam Balto on this weekly trip to school. Balto advocated strongly for the diverter at neighborhood meetings and is now singing its praises (see recent tweet below):
PBOT deserves praise here not only for the project and its design, but for trudging deftly through a thorny bit of pushback from some people in the neighborhood who didn’t want the diverter installed. Back in March, the board of the Beaumont-Wilshire Neighborhood Association actually voted 7-4 in opposition to it with concerns about diversion of traffic to other streets, a reduction in convenience while driving, and various other reasons.
That vote forced PBOT to spend several months trying to hammer out a different solution that would address those concerns yet still have the desired safety goals. But in the end PBOT decided the full diverter was the right choice all along.
From what I saw this morning, PBOT made the right decision. Hopefully those neighbors come around eventually.
Have you driven or ridden this yet? What do you think so far? Don’t miss my little video below (and please subscribe to our YouTube channel so we can reach 1,000 subs!).
State Capitol building in Salem in 2009. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
**UPDATE: We will continue to add new bills to this list as they are introduced and have added several since the guide was first published.**
While the Oregon Legislature won’t officially convene until next Tuesday (January 17th), the bills we’ll be talking about in the months to come are now available for perusal. While only a very tiny fraction of bills that are introduced actually become law, it’s worth knowing what gets proposed. If nothing else these bills can give us some hope (or dread), and they reveal something about the lawmaker(s) behind them.
There are several very intriguing bills session. Some are serious, some are less so, but they’re all fair game at this point as the sausage-making machine begins to whir. We’ve flagged bills that would: repeal Oregon’s recent parking reforms, repeal the “Idaho Stop” law, create a statewide bicycle registration program, transfer Powell Blvd from ODOT to the City of Portland, create a tax on EV charging, make “sleeping in a highway danger zone” a traffic violation, and more.
Below is a roundup and brief description of the 24 bills we’ve flagged so far. We will have missed some, so please, if you hear about a bike and/or transportation-related bill, please let us know and we’ll add it to our watch list.
Here’s the list in numerical order:
Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 2 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25) Official Summary: “Proposes amendment to Oregon Constitution to authorize use of motor vehicle-related tax revenue for infrastructure that reduces traffic burden of, or pollution from, motor vehicles on public roads in this state.”
This is a very exciting proposal that would finally amend Article IX, Section 3a of our state constitution so that money we raise from taxes and fees on cars and trucks can be spent on things other than projects that encourage more use of cars and trucks. The existing restriction wields vast influence over policies and projects and this could be a game-changer. Sen. Gorsek wants the constitutional amendment to be put in front of voters in the 2024 general election.
Senate Bill 301 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. Kim Thatcher (R-11) Official Summary: “Provides that person operating bicycle may not treat stop signs and flashing red lights as yield signs if bicyclist slows bicycle to safe speed.”
Looks as though someone dislikes the “slow, then go” (a.k.a. Idaho Stop) law Oregon passed in 2019 so much they want to repeal it completely. This bill was filed on behalf of a specific person (David Samuel Hill) in what what lawmakers will often call a “constituent bill.” That could mean it’s not much of a priority for Sen. Thatcher and she’s just doing it to satisfy a constituent request. The current law allows bicycle users to treat stop signs and flashing red signals as yield signs, as long as they first slow and make sure there’s no cross traffic. Even though this isn’t likely to make much noise during the session, it’s interesting to see that someone cares enough to make this effort and there’s a lawmaker willing to go along with them.
SB 580 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. Floyd Prozanksi (D-4) Official Summary: “Requires Land Conservation and Development Commission to amend statewide planning goals to address equity, engagement with underserved populations and climate change.”
Back in July, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission voted in what advocates called “the largest rollback of parking mandates in U.S. history.” The new law, that went into effect on January 1st, gives Oregon’s largest cities the ability to develop land without a requirement to include car parking stalls. Supporters of the idea say it’s a way to increase housing supply, and create more climate-friendly communities. But the cities of Springfield, Medford, Hillsboro, Cornelius, Happy Valley, and Troutdale; along with the nonprofit lobby group League of Oregon Cities, isn’t quite ready for the change. They are the entities who’ve asked Sen. Prozanski to delay implementation of the new laws until a host of amendments can be made. Portlanders for Parking Reform leader Tony Jordan has wasted no time sharing his opinion about it: “SB 580 would reinstate hurdles to solving tough problems. Let’s crush it.”
SB 598 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. Kathleen Taylor (D-21) Official Summary: “Transfers jurisdiction of Southeast Powell Boulevard to City of Portland.”
Sen. Taylor has kids who attend Cleveland High School and she was the (highly engaged) emcee of the Powell Blvd Safety Forum held at the high school back in October. The bill would force ODOT and PBOT to hammer out a deal to make the transfer and would cover the stretch of Powell from Southeast 9th Avenue to I-205.
SB 615* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25) Official Summary: “Modifies crime of organizing speed racing event. Punishes by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Punishes second and subsequent convictions within five-year period by maximum of five years’ imprisonment, $125,000 fine, or both. Modifies crime of reckless driving to include activities related to speed racing. Authorizes criminal forfeiture of instrumentalities of crime of reckless driving.”
SB 693 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. James Manning (D-7) Official Summary: “Establishes voluntary bicycle registration program. Sets registration, transfer of ownership, change of address and other fees. Establishes Bicycle Transportation Improvement Fund. Makes bicycle ownership information available to law enforcement agencies.”
Here we go again. Sen. Manning has filed this bill on behalf of a constituent named Zach Mulholland. It’s unclear why he thinks this would be a good idea, but the proposal is to establish a voluntary bicycle registration program run by the State of Oregon. Perhaps Mr. Mulholland thinks this would help with bike theft? Or he thinks it would be a good way to raise money? The bill would require people to pay $12 for a registration certificate, $3 for a serial number, $3 if the registrant changes address, and $6 if the bike transfers ownership. Proposals for mandatory registration have gone down in flames at least twice in the past — once in 2009 and again in 2015 — so maybe he thinks making this voluntary will be the trick. Not likely! I’ll eat my cycling cap if this even gets a committee hearing.
SB 719 (Overview) Sponsor: Sen. Fred Girod (R-9) Official Summary: “Defines terms used in Article IX, section 16, of Oregon Constitution. Modifies law related to tolling to conform with enactment of Article IX, section 16, of Oregon Constitution. Takes effect only if _____ Joint Resolution __ (2023) (LC 156) is approved by people at next regular general election.”
This appears to be an attempt to put a pause on all of ODOT’s existing plans to toll freeways (which were granted to them in 2017) until the issue can be sent out to a public vote via a referendum in November 2024.
SB 895 (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: At the request of Richard Hughes and Doug Parrow Official Summary: “Modifies offense of passing in no passing zone. Clarifies that term “obstruction” includes person riding bicycle or operating another type of vehicle.”
This bill seems to amend ORS 811.420 to make it clear that car drivers can cross over a centerline in a “No Passing Zone” in order to safely pass a bike rider.
House Bill 2095 (Overview) Sponsor: At the request of Joint Committee on Transportation for League of Oregon Cities Official Summary: “Authorizes all cities to elect to operate photo radar if city pays costs of operating photo radar. Eliminates restriction on number of hours per day photo radar may be used in any one location. Expands authority of city to set designated speed for certain residential streets to speed that is up to 10 miles per hour lower than statutory speed, but not less than 20 miles per hour.”
This bill would expand the authority to use photo radar cameras to every city in Oregon (currently it’s limited to just 10 cities) and expand their scope in general. It would also give cities the authority to lower speed limits 10 mph below statutory speeds (like school zones and business zones) instead of the current 5 mph.
HB 2101 (Overview) Sponsor: Joint Transportation Committee at request of Oregon Association of Counties Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to establish local transportation program to provide state funding in exchange for federal surface transportation funding available to cities and counties.”
This appears to be an attempt by lobby group Oregon Association of Counties to exchange federal transportation funding for state funding so they can make sure it abides by Article IX section 3a of the Oregon Constitution which states that certain state transportation funds can only be spent “exclusively for the construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, maintenance, operation and use of public highways, roads, streets and roadside rest areas in this state.”
House Bill 2301 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Rick Lewis (R-18) Official Summary: “Imposes tax on use of electricity to charge battery of electric vehicle at rate equivalent to rate of license tax imposed on first sale, use or distribution of motor vehicle fuel.”
This detailed proposal would create an entirely new state program to administer and enforce a tax on EV charging that, if unpaid, would be punishable by a year in jail or a $6,250 fine.
House Bill 2518 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Pam Marsh (D-5) Official Summary: “Expands traffic offense of pedestrian with improper position upon or improperly proceeding along a highway to include prohibiting pedestrian on interstate highways. Expands traffic offense of pedestrian with improper position upon or improperly proceeding along a highway to include prohibiting pedestrian on interstate highways. Punishes violation by maximum fine of $250.”
This bill would add the words, “Takes a position upon or proceeds along an interstate highway” to the Oregon Revised Statute 814.070. That statute is what defines all the circumstances where a pedestrian can be found liable of being in an illegal location/position on a public road. The only thing I can think of that would prompt Rep. Marsh to propose this is the increasing amount of people who live near interstate freeways and who walk on and adjacent to them as a result. In some ways this type of thinking is very much in line with how Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler moved to ban camping on freeway on-ramps back in February.
HB 2571 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Dacia Grayber (D-28), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41) Official Summary: “Directs Department of Environmental Quality to establish program for providing rebates to qualifying individuals who purchase electric assisted bicycles or cargo electric bicycles and qualifying equipment.”
This is the bill we first covered back in November that would give purchasers of electric bikes a healthy rebate right at the point of sale — up to $1,200 for a standard bike or $1,700 for a cargo bike. The bill also asks for a $6 million out of the state’s general fund to pay for the rebates under a program run by the Department of Environmental Quality. This bill would harken in a new era of bicycling for Oregon, stimulate millions of dollars in local economies from bike shop sales, and help us achieve a myriad of climate, transportation, and health-related goals.
HB 2619 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-33), Sen. Wlnsvey Campos (D-18) Official Summary: “Modifies membership of Oregon Transportation Commission. Directs Governor to appoint executive director for commission.”
This could be a big one. It appears that Rep. Pham has heeded years of calls from transportation reformers to reform the OTC and make it more accountable to Oregonians. The OTC is a five-member body that oversees ODOT and wields immense influence over the state’s transportation budget, projects, and policies. This bill would finally force the governor to appoint a more representative roster, including at least one member who is younger than 25 (a top demand of youth climate activists), one who gets around without car, one who has a disability, one who can represent Oregon Indian tribes, and so on. The bill also seeks the appointment of an OTC executive director to manage and oversee the commission, as well as other accountability measures. A more responsive and representative OTC is long overdue and this bill seems like a great step forward.
HB 2658 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41) Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to determine carbon emissions of motor vehicles and impose additional registration fee based on relative vehicle carbon emissions.”
This novel concept would add a new fee onto car and truck owners based on how much carbon their vehicle emits, then use revenue raised to create a new Transportation Modernization Grant Fund that would invest in, “projects designed to reduce carbon or other greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.”
HB 2662 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26) Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation, in collaboration with Tri-Met and Portland & Western Railroad to study extending Westside Express Service commuter line to Salem.”
Rare to see support for the WES, TriMet’s heavy rail commuter train that we hardly ever hear about and that has been roundly criticized for low ridership.
HB 2677 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Sen. Wlnsvey Campos (D-18) Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation to provide funding plan for highway maintenance when transportation project that adds lane miles is added to STIP.”
Rep. Pham is a noted freeway expansion critic and this appears to be a novel way of forcing ODOT into being more transparent about how much it costs to add lanes to Oregon interstates. The bill would create a new law requiring ODOT to detail how they’d fund maintenance of new highway lanes without robbing existing the highway maintenance budget. This would add heft to growing calls that ODOT stops spending money on new highway lanes until they invest more on dangerous orphan highways like Powell Blvd.
HB 2691 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Nancy Nathanson (D-13), Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25) Official Summary: “Provides that any agreement related to providing ultra-high-speed ground transportation in this state must include service to Eugene. Prohibits Department of Transportation from expending in any biennium more than 50 percent, or $1 million, whichever is less, of moneys available to department for passenger rail service, on ultra-high-speed ground transportation.”
With high speed rail talks building steam, it looks like these legislators want to cause a delay. It seems odd to propose a bill that simultaneously limits investment in high speed rail, but then also wants to make sure if it does happen, it makes it to Eugene. Would be ironic if we had a high speed rail project on the table that planned to go to Eugene, but didn’t have enough funding to get there. Of course at this stage of the game, these bills can take wildly new forms (what they call a “gut and stuff”) so this could just be a placeholder for other high speed rail-related ideas.
HB 2838 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Paul Evans (D-20) Official Summary: “Creates offense of sleeping in highway danger zone.”
Rep. Evans wants to create a new traffic violation that could be applied to a person caught sleeping on the ground within 10 feet of the outside edge or curb of any roadway in Oregon between sunset and sunrise. Violators would be subject to a $100 fine.
HB 2951 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26), Rep. Ricki Ruiz (D-50) Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to establish program for awarding grants to providers of traffic safety education courses to fund Spanish language traffic safety education courses.”
HB 3014 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26), Rep. Hoa Nguyen (D-48), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41), Rep. Rob Nosse (D-42) Official Summary: “Directs State Board of Education to adopt rules that allow for reimbursement of school district expenses incurred in lieu of transporting students.”
This intriguing bill looks to be a way to give school districts more flexibility in how they spend school transportation dollars. It would give district administrators the ability to seek a reimbursements from the state for any costs they would have otherwise spent on transportation (which is mostly buses). If I’m reading it right, this is bill that tries encourage more bike buses like the very successful one at Alameda Elementary School in Portland. Districts can use the reimbursements from bus transportation and instead spend it on things like public transit passes, “pedestrian or bicycle group leaders” and promoting other transportation options.
HB 3016 (Overview) Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Senator Michael Dembrow (D-23), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41) Official Summary: “Establishes Community Green Infrastructure Grant Program. Establishes Community Green Infrastructure Fund.”
This bill would define a “community green infrastructure project” as something that, “provides social, environmental or economic benefits to a particular community and is developed through a collaborative process that helps define those benefits.” It would also create a grant funding program (with no financial commitment yet), a committee to oversee the grants, and it calls for a statewide tree canopy assessment tool.
HB 3036 (Overview) Sponsor: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26) Official Summary: “Permits education provider to operate video recording device for purpose of recording persons who fail to stop for bus safety lights.”
This bill was filed at the request of one of Rep. Neron’s constituents (Sean Sype) and has some very notable co-sponsors in Rep. Pham, Rep. Zach Hudson (D-49), Joint Transportation Committee leader Rep. Susan McLain (D-29) and Sen. Lew Frederick (D-33). It would give schools the option of installing video cameras on the swing-arm of school buses that displays a stop sign. These arms are deployed when students are being let off the bus and the vehicle’s rear signals are flashing. It’s already Oregon law to not pass a bus in this situation; but far too many road users do anyways. These cameras would act much like red light cameras and would send a citation to suspected violators. Unfortunately the bill text currently says a police officer must review the camera footage when we know that’s been a major problem for the City of Portland’s program. Perhaps they can replace “police officer” with “duly authorized traffic enforcement agent.” Any revenue raised would go into a new fund controlled by the Department of Education.
HB 3113 (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: Rep. Susan McLain (D-29) Official Summary: “Appropriates moneys from General Fund to Department of Transportation, for biennium beginning July 1, 2023, for improving safety and increasing access to walking, biking and transit on state highways that serve as community main streets. “
HB 3212* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: Rep. E. Werner Reschke (R-55) Official Summary: “Directs State Parks and Recreation Department to conduct study to determine feasibility of authorizing use of electric assisted bicycles on public trails that allow for use of nonmotorized bicycles.”
UPDATE, 2/14: Rep. Reschke told me via email this is just a constituent bill. Someone he represents wanted to know why he can’t take his e-bike on State Park trails, so Rep. Reschke thought a study of the issue would be a good step forward to help educate other legislators about the issue.
HB 3224* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: Rep. Tom Andersen (D-19), Sen. Deb Patterson (D-10) Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation, State Department of Energy and Department of Environmental Quality to collaborate with City of Salem and mass transit agencies to study feasibility of developing rail streetcar system in city of Salem.”
HB 3374* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published* Sponsor: Rep. Jeff Helfrich (R-52) Official Summary: “Replaces references to vehicle accident and vehicle collision with vehicle crash.”
How a Bill Becomes Law. (Source: State of Oregon)
The next step for these bills is to await committee assignments (see the full process of how a bill becomes law in the graphic above). Then they’ll need to earn a public hearing and a vote in committee. There are deadlines for all these steps and as time goes on we’ll discover which of these — if any — has the momentum and support it takes to reach the finish line.
We will likely add more bills to this list. Please let us know if you find others we should know about. We hope to have a lot of exciting, transportation-related bills to cover and debate this session — and with any luck a few of the good ones will actually pass (and the bad ones will die).
