Revelations in the media this week that two Portland city commissioners have shown blatant disregard for traffic laws and the consequences for breaking them, make it much easier to understand why our roads often feel like lawless wastelands and road safety issues are not a high priority at City Hall.
The Willamette Week reported Monday that starting in 1998, city commissioner and mayoral candidate Rene Gonzalez, “racked up seven speeding tickets in Oregon (one was dismissed); twice had his driving license suspended (in 1998 and 2003); and was cited four times for failure to display current registration on his vehicle.” In 2014 Gonzalez was cited for not having a valid ticket on a MAX train. On several occasions, Gonzalez wrote letters to the court making excuses for his actions and asking for relief from consequences.
Also yesterday, The Oregonian shared that another mayoral candidate and commissioner, Carmen Rubio, “racked up more than 150 parking and traffic violations over the last two decades, failing to pay most of them for months or sometimes years.”
Taken by themselves, these stories would be troubling and disappointing. When combined with the daily lawlessness we see on our streets, they are something even worse. Below is just a sample of the dangerous, reckless driving I’ve heard about in the past few days…
Yesterday a driver managed to flip their car on NE 33rd at Going Street.
Also on Monday, yet another driver took their car onto a carfree path, a worrying trend that is being reported much more often lately.
And on Sunday, a driver plowed through the front of a Plaid Pantry on NE Glisan near 102nd.
Two days prior to that, on Friday September 6th, the Portland Police Bureau responded to a crash on SE Division Street. Someone who was walking had life-threatening injuries after being hit by a driver at SE 158th. Then about twenty minutes later another call came about another collision a few blocks away: Another pedestrian was seriously injured by a driver.
None of this is normal. In fact, it’s madness.
The dysfunctional driving culture that currently rules our roadways is more powerful and dangerous than the infrastructure we might build to prevent it. Until we are willing to create carfree zones and truly safe streets where driving is prohibited and/or severely constrained, our only hope is to improve culture and find leaders who can model better behaviors.
Maybe Mingus Mapps, another sitting city commissioner who wants to be mayor, is the guy?
At a press conference following a rise in traffic deaths held in front of City Hall one year ago Mapps said he wanted to, “bring about culture change” on our roads. But not only did Mapps never do anything substantive to follow-up that statement, we learned one month later during the Broadway Bike Lane Scandal he presided over that he also has a trust deficit on transportation issues.
Maybe that’s why Mapps’ campaign has seized on the negative press for Gonzalez and Rubio with an email just sent out to his supporters. “I don’t have a single traffic citation,” Mapps writes in the email. “As a Black man, I don’t get to flout the rules… If I had over 150 violations in recent years, not only would I not be on the City Council today, I would be in jail.”
If it takes an election campaign to prioritize the importance of responsible vehicle use and clean up traffic culture, I’m all for it. Portland is desperate for civilized streets. To get them we need serious, trustworthy leaders who want to make our roads better for everyone as much as they want to gain power for themselves.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Thank you for writing this, Jonathan. Dangerous driving, disregard for simple rules, are deeply disturbing to me. I don’t care how many kids you have, where you need to be, how late you are … what is the big deal with just following rules, and having basic courtesy toward others?
“It is a good idea to obey all the rules when you’re young just so you’ll have the strength to break them when you’re old.” ~ Mark Twain
Thank you Lisa. It’s this — the mere fact that these folks broke the simple car operating rules we have, such as where you can leave your vehicle and for how long, again and again and again is the fundamental warning flag to me. Somehow these rules, which are usually there for the safety of OTHERS, are ok to disregard by certain of our leaders is just wrong. The non payment is a whole other beast.
And leadership does matter. Role modeling does matter. I’m thinking about a person I met yesterday in the yoga studio who was rear ended (car totaled) while DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY. Not stopped on the freeway, driving on the freeway. I’m not a fan of slippery slope arguments, but there’s an attitude about respecting other’s and comporting yourself in such a way that just bleeds into our community.
This just happened, too
On average, a car crashes into a 7-Eleven every day. People die in these crashes, but 7-Eleven does nothing about it. Recently, a man in Chicago won a settlement for 91 million dollars after loosing both of his legs in a crash. The judge ruled that 7-Eleven had a duty to install bollards. Similarly, PBOT and ODOT have an obligation to protect road users that are threatened by cars and trucks.
Portland has never had a champion for road safety or non-car transportation in city or state government leadership.
https://www.dailynews.com/2023/02/08/one-mans-case-reveals-cars-slam-into-storefronts-like-7-eleven-with-alarming-frequency/
Cars and trucks aren’t “threatening”, the a-hole drivers operating them are!
I agree it is important to give driver’s agency, but it is a mistake to give them too much agency. Many killer drivers are not a-holes. There is an error rate with motor vehicle operation that is baked-in. We have mountains of data describing the risk of driving that insurance rates are based on. Humans aren’t going to evolve into super-drivers. 7-Eleven, for whatever reason, thought that it was not worth the trouble to mitigate the dangers of their dangerous storefront. Hopefully, this lawsuit changes the math for them. BOTs and DOTs need to be prodded with the same stick.
There is nothing that an bureaucratic decision-maker loves more than shrugging their shoulders, pointing to a mandate and saying “we have no choice.”
Are you being sarcastic or is it the same reasoning as “guns don’t kill people”?
Trucks and SUVs are more likely to kill you at the same speed than a normal passenger car. Their kinetic energy is proportional to their mass. Plus the height of the front bumper makes impacts a lot more dangerous for pedestrians.
Oh, how completely American.
Buy property, build a building on that property. Car drives into building. Owner of building is at fault for injuries sustained in the crash.
What next? Occupant of building hit by stray gunfire, owner of building is liable because he didn’t install bullet proof glass.
How about: occupant of building is killed when a plane crashes into it. Owner of building is liable because they didn’t install a fricking force field.
The fact that it already happened over 6.000 times is relevant, as is the fact that the solution (bollards) is pretty cheap.
We also don’t know the details of 7/11s response. In the famous McDonald’s coffee spill burn case, the victim originally asked for a very minor amount of money to pay medical expenses. McDonald’s had lots of opportunities to avoid ending up with a large verdict. It’s possible that happened with this case also.
I read the linked article and get that 7-Eleven could install bollards between parking spots and stores … but really, I think it’s crazy to sue them for not. Should I install bollards in my yard so somebody zooming down Klickitat to avoid Sandy Blvd traffic (happens every day) doesn’t jump the curb and crash into my living room? Somebody smashed into my local 7-Eleven at 62nd and Sandy, destroyed the Amazon lockers inside the store – and unless I am mistaken there are bollards at that store. I wholly agree with the sentiment of Jonathan’s post, but I don’t think holding property owners responsible for injuries caused by drivers is the answer.
7-Eleven designs their storefront and often, parking, and makes decisions on how they are built. They had enough data to know that their design was dangerous and they could make it less dangerous.
You don’t have control over the road that goes by your house. If there is a greater risk of crashes into your house because of road design, the road builders should be responsible for mitigating that risk.
The problem now, is that BOTs and DOTs place the value of private property (cars and trucks) over the value of life.
Sounds to me like this is normal. It’s also sad. I also have the feeling that this won’t move the needle in how people will vote which would also be telling.
. “I don’t have a single traffic citation,” Mapps writes in the email. “As a Black man, I don’t get to flout the rules… If I had over 150 violations in recent years, not only would I not be on the City Council today, I would be in jail.”
But 2 Latinos have privilege? Oh come on Mr. Mapps. Let’s stop this racial division stuff and just working on getting back to “the city that works”.
Do you work or volunteer for the Gonzalez campaign?
I ask because just about everything you post here seems related to their campaign’s messaging.
Why wouldn’t you ask if I worked for Rubio’s campaign or Liv Osthus’ campaign? They’re running against Mapps too right? And to your point: Nope I’m just a moderate Democrat who has nothing to do with politics for employment. The suspicion in this community is beyond the pale. …
There’s someone over on the Portland subreddit who very much sounds like they work for the Gonzalez campaign as well. It’s constant pot stirring and echoes campaign messaging.
I don’t doubt that but there are also multiple commenters on Bike Portland who sound like they work for the Carmen Rubio campaign….doesn’t mean they are right? It’s seems like a bit of “Portland paranoia”. Of
course, I’m sure in Texas (outside of Austin) left leaning posters are accused of working for the “evil RINO candidate”
That’s not true.
I think commissioner mapp’s race is highly relevant. Even more relevant is his complete lack of traffic citations.
I’m still very upset about bike lane snafus on Broadway and 42nd that occurred under his leadership, and his mealy mouth explanations and double talk regarding bike infrastructure. But he is still light years better than Rubio and Gonzalez on transportation issues and leadership style.
So Latinos aren’t discriminated against both generally nor by the police!?
I’m not voting for any of the 3 of them. They all 3 to varying degrees have been contributors to the status quo that we’re rejecting in the new form of city government – I don’t see them as worthy of our trust to be part of the solutions we need. I agree that Mapps’s race is highly relevant when discussing the ramifications of scofflaw driving. Not so much when we look at his job performance. But Gonzalez’s and Rubio’s driving records are very off-putting to me. I get the occasional ticket – like a couple per decade. And I have a heavy foot! I have never in my life had my license suspended. In particular, Gonzalez’s explanations ring hollow. “Needed to get to a Trailblazers game.”
Agreed… I started off agreeing with Mapps statement but when he brought race into the message, i just rolled my eyes. Rubios platform definitively inflates her intersectionality as a Woman of Latin American heritage. Gonzalez is the epitome of Mexicans American immigrant (and Spanish generally) surnames.
Is Mingus asserting Latino Americans are immune to police discrimination!?
It’s madness because it’s normal.
Love the photo, by the way.
Particularly the “NOTICE it doesn’t have to be like this.”
Gonzalez’s moving violations were from 20+ years ago (even his MAX ticket is over a decade old). When he says he’s matured, I believe him.
Meanwhile Rubio was driving on a suspended license:
… and sent to collections over 100 times for unpaid tickets, even after she was making a six-figure income, well into her 40s. Apparently couldn’t be bothered to register her car as recently as 2023! When she tries to excuse her irresponsible behavior away it rings incredibly false. Either she thinks the law does not apply to her… or her personal affairs are in complete disarray. Maybe it’s a mix of both? Either way that’s not mayor material.
He says he’s matured, but he still breaks the law with frivolous 911 calls and many other examples of poor, immature and impulsive decision making. It would be easier to give him the benefit of the doubt if he didn’t still act like he is above the law.
Seems like a bad look to judge a person who decides they are in danger and needs to call 911.
Maybe you forgot or don’t value having credibility.
Gonzalez called 911 a significant period of time after the woman who brushed his aisle seat shoulder on the max had left the train.
He called 911 claiming he was “lightly assaulted” and told the 911 operator he was not in danger.
In case it isn’t apparent, he is a grown man. He was a grown man when he carelessly broke traffic laws, and he was a grown man when he tried to have a black woman arrested for selfish reasons.
What were his selfish reasons?
Immediately turning it into a campaign video.
Gonzalez’s campaign video about the event has apparently been scoured from the internet (or at least Google). Do you happen to have a link?
https://x.com/PRADAPDX/status/1760400155206193611
Thanks, I hadn’t seen that. I don’t agree with your characterization of the situation or the video, but it was interesting nonetheless.
Watch the trimet video, listen to the 911 call, read his PR releases and consider the above video and then provide a cogent explanation of what happened and what Rene tried to accomplish. I am curious how others put this together.
I’m not going to try to get inside his head; the TriMet incident (which I agree appeared pretty minor from the video) came on the heels of the arson attack against him.
The video simply did not read as a campaign video to me.
Eh, Gonzalez is a professional attorney who repeatedly failed to appear at scheduled court hearings. He also drove on a suspended license. I don’t know how he’s qualified to work in the legal profession, let alone as an elected official. Rubio is worse, but Gonzalez is bad.
Just want to say to folks that respond to Gonzalez stuff as “it was so long ago.” That doesn’t make it normal or OK!! Yes that makes it less relevant to this election in many ways (especially compared to Rubio), but my whole point is that we should[n’t] just be like, “oh he was young and dumb, everyone breaks traffic laws and doesn’t stand up to consequences for breaking them.”
Is anyone saying it was normal or ok? I personally haven’t seen that. I think it’s pretty normal to feel that a crime or misbehavior committed 20 years ago (with subsequent good behavior) is less impactful than more recent criminal activity/misbehavior.
Before I sold my car last year I was a high mileage driver in a heavily car dependent area for 20 years starting at the age of 16. In that whole time I received only one ticket which was for an expired tag and I rectified it the next day. It’s not hard at all to just drive responsibly. Driving behavior shows how someone acts when they’re anonymous, and it’s very telling.
I was able to follow all the rules even in my teens and twenties, why should I ignore it when someone running for mayor can’t even follow those same rules? Why should I ignore it when the people breaking those same rules endanger me every time I leave my house not in a car?
Thanks for bringing this up Jonathan, I think it’s very relevant.
Not for nothing, but they endanger you even if you leave your house in a car. This (dangerous driving culture) should be universally agreed that it’s a problem for everyone.
Completely disagree. As somebody that moved here 20 years ago as a car-head and absorbed the bicycle culture I’m a completely different person thanks to Bike Portland when it comes to transportation. You can’t hold me to that past because that’s not who I am now. People can learn and change. It was normal, and it wasn’t ok, but it should have been neither the entire time.
I agree people can learn and change and I’m not saying that I think Gonzalez is the same person he was back then. Just saying that we (as a society) shouldn’t brush off stuff like this as something that is normal and acceptable just because someone is young and immature.
I’m mostly with you, Johnny. In 1998, just to drill down to that year since it is mentioned here, I was 22 and surely a total idiot. If Gonzalez is 50 he was 24 at the time, in my estimation, still peak total idiot times. I’m glad that I’m not being judged by what I did or said back then. Are there things that can stick with you for your life? Things so beyond the pale that it’s hard to ignore? Yeah, sure. But driving like a moron, as much as I hate it and it is incredibly selfish and irresponsible, I don’t know if that is relevant here.
I am not a Gonzalez supporter. Honestly, everyone on the City Council seems to suck. I hope none of them have jobs after the election.
Hear, hear. My ballot will not include incumbents.
I can agree
He’s matured into a budding fascist. He and his campaign social media surrogates ran a (successful) campaign against JoAnn Hardesty that was the most racist I can remember in Portland since “Don’t choke ’em, smoke ’em” in 1985. The fact that Rene lied about his recent TriMet experience thinking it would get him cheap points suggests that he will lie about any topic he thinks is important. Nothing he says about anything should be taken at face value. He’s totally unsuited to any position of public trust in any capacity. He is what reactionary politicians look like in progressive places like Portland.
And he’s probably going to win.
I don’t think so — he has a solid voter base but ranked choice will help not elect him. I think a majority of voters are a no.
Be careful Ginny…now the Rubio supporters of the bike portland peanut gallery will say YOU are working for Gonzalez. The paranoia is high in Portland it seems.
Yes Rene has proven himself. Seriously 21 years ago with his current track record. Time to let it go!
Big thumbs up for this opinion piece. I couldn’t agree more. I’m hopeful that things are calming down a little bit, but it feels like Mad Max sometimes walking and biking among all this aggro traffic.
Mapps is the only major mayoral candidate I don’t get the icks thinking about voting for
There’s Keith Wilson.
He is far and away the best candidate.
Rubio should remove herself from the race and should resign her commission seat.
How does she not get her car impounded for refusing to pay tickets?
Her car was impounded, multiple times, according to the Oregonian article.
You’d think having their car seized would get a person’s attention.
yeah if i were in charge of Keith Wilson’s campaign I’d get him behind the wheel of one of his big rigs and record him doing a social media video about the value of being a responsible driver.
C’mon, Jonathan. Mayor is an important office and we need to take it seriously.
I for one can’t vote for Keith Wilson b/c he has never held elective office. Why would we entrust the highest political office in the city to someone who has never held office?
I’m still inclined to vote for Gonzalez, who has shown he has the cojones to stand up to dysfunctional interests in Portland (there are so many!). And he rides a bike! He should get the BP endorsement for that fact alone.
I agree we should take the office of mayor seriously. That’s why I’m not excited about voting for Gonzalez or Mapps or Rubio. All of them seem like unserious leaders to me. And Wilson will likely be my first choice. I’ve known him for years and remain very impressed on many levels. I don’t think experience holding a local elected office is as important as you make it seem.
LOL, Ted Wheeler held elective office before, so did Charlie Hales, so has almost every person who has mismanaged the city in the last 10 years.
Under the new system, mayor is largely a managerial and administrative role. Wilson has a lot more experience in that capacity than Rubio, Gonzalez, or Mapps (or any of the other candidates).
Recent Portland mayors who had not previously held elected office: Tom Potter, Bud Clark. Meantime, it’s not clear that Ted Wheeler’s and Sam Adams’s prior tenures in elected office correlates to them being successful mayor. Also I suspect that Trump (= no prior elected office) voters in Portland are most likely to vote for Gonzalez as he positions himself as the “moderate” in the race.
But not while that big rig is in motion, of course. We don’t need a repeat of Betsy Johnson!
Jest aside, wasn’t Wilson’s whole thing looking at the accident rate of his fleet and taking steps to take that down to basically zero? I.e., making the streets safer, compared to the three current sitting council folk?
He should be slamming them with this.
His fleet is also fully electric, which shows he cares about safety and the environment in the city.
I’ve heard people say that, but can’t verify it. It’s a bit unclear, but it sounds like Titan (Wilson’s company) has 3 electric trucks.
If someone knows where there is clear info on this, please point the way.
Per the Portland Mercury, “Looking over Keith Wilson’s records, the business owner and mayoral candidate appears to have racked up 13 tickets since 1992, one of which was dismissed and eight of which were parking tickets. Court records indicate Wilson invoiced a parking ticket he received in 2018 to his own business, Titan Freight Systems. His latest brush with parking overlords came in April, when he was cited for not paying a meter downtown.”
Thanks Lois! I hadn’t seen that.
Sounds like a normal person
That’s definitely well above average, especially in Portland, where enforcement is minimal to zero.
I’m under the impression some think None of this is normal.
I guess that leaves Mapps vs. Viva Las Vegas. I wonder how many tickets she has?
Keith was growing on me but isn’t he too now caught in a scandal involving quid-pro-quo swapping donations with other mayor/council candidates to inflate their 9:1 tax payer funded “small donor” contribution matching?
No.
No reporting so far has shown Wilson involved in collusion.
https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2024/09/09/unusual-donations-between-portland-city-council-candidates-were-widespread-campaign-finance-data-shows/
Check WW, 29 “mutual transactions”
Mutual transactions != collusion.
Mutual transactions could just mean I agree with someone and want to support them, and that can be mutual. That is neither scandalous nor illegal (until there’s an e-mail chain/etc saying I’ll trade them for donations).
I disagree that it is not scandalous. $5 donations quickly become real taxpayer money especially if the politicians help each get over matching fund thresholds. I agree with you that proving it is illegal is likely not going to happen as there is little desire to upend the feed trough that all the politicians have potential access to.
Absent collusion, this is no more scandalous than you or I donating $5. I donated to candidates to help them get over matching fund thresholds to help elect people who I think would best represent me as a constituent. Don’t forget that the mayor is also a constituent of their district, and their district reps constituents of the mayor.
Sure, except the reporting we’re talking about. This is unserious conspiracy nonsense.
Read the article! Unless there is evidence of a “quid pro quo” explicit agreement to reciprocate donations, there’s no way to know whether these were just genuine donations. I’m sure plenty of City Council candidates genuinely support Keith Wilson for Mayor and wanted to donate to his campaign, and Keith Wilson probably supports plenty of City Council candidates and wanted to donate to their campaigns. Just because they happen to overlap doesn’t mean their was any coordination or promises or collusion.
Some candidates did explicitly coordinate, but even in those cases it sounds like a fairly innocent mistake where they didn’t know about the way campaign finance law worked, and they can probably easily correct the error by finding those donations and refunding them. But so far I haven’t seen any implication that Keith Wilson or the vast majority of other Council and Mayor candidates listed in this article actually did anything wrong.
agreed! I am excited by Wilson and turned off by all the other candidates. He is the most promising candidate we have had for years
Haven’t heard of him. I’ll check him out
Hi Lisa,
Wilson is third highest of the mutual donation transactions.
Luke Zak in District 3: 31 mutual transactions.
Loretta Smith in District 1: 29 mutual transactions.
Keith Wilson, candidate for mayor: 29 mutual transactions.
Timur Ender in District 1: 28 mutual transactions.
Chad Lykins in District 4: 24 mutual transactions.
Tiffany Koyama Lane in District 3: 20 mutual transactions.
Sarah Silkie in District 4: 19 mutual transactions.
Liv Osthus, candidate for mayor: 19 mutual transactions.
Mariah Hudson in District 2: 18 mutual transactions.
William Mespelt in District 2: 17 mutual transactions.
Sameer Kanal in District 2: 17 mutual transactions.
Eric Zimmerman in District 4: 16 mutual transactions.
https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2024/09/09/unusual-donations-between-portland-city-council-candidates-were-widespread-campaign-finance-data-shows/
I know most people here are quite happy with one party effective rule, but it sure hasn’t generated a good crop of mayoral candidates what with the driving insanity, victimization complex and either corruption or a serious misunderstanding of election rules. But what do I know, if you’re financially sound enough to enjoy it there still maybe this is just normal?
If you create a system begging to be gamed, it shouldn’t be shocking when it’s gamed.
I think it would be appropriate for those who used illegal tactics to qualify for public financing should lose their public financing. A stern finger waggling is not enough.
It’s not shocking. What’s shocking is that many will probably pretzel logic themselves into believing that all that article revealed was a nothingburger and all those candidates were just helping themselves to more of the taxpayers money that they deserved. When I still drank and in Portland my partner and I would sit down with huge pina coladas and go through the voting process.
You have my best wishes that somehow this cycle will turn out better.
I think, to Watts’ point, if the system is begging to be gamed, you lose if you aren’t gaming it. You don’t win any points for doing the right thing in that case, you just get less money and lose the election.
A fair point and I think you make an excellent observation as to the type of people that seem to succeed in Portland politics who are not interested in doing the right thing from the beginning.
This is exactly what high-earners say about our tax system. And it’s not what I said; I think a strong candidate can win without cheating.
Obviously that’s a tendency, people will tend to win if they take advantage of loopholes like that, not an unbreakable law of nature. A candidate can win for president with $0 and no prior experience if only everyone votes for them, but it’s not very likely.
If it’s cheating, it’s supposed to be illegal. If it just looks bad (when framed to look that way) but you are a fool not to do it, people will. I think the mutual donations are the latter. Easy to portray it in a way that sounds bad but not something that was intended to be illegal.
High earners that use “loopholes” in the tax code are exactly the same, yes. If we don’t want the bad looking thing to happen, we should close the loopholes. I don’t think people should pay taxes they aren’t obligated to pay because that’s no way to run a democracy (generous benevolence or ignorance of the tax code). So in that sense, “high-earners” are right, although really this applies to everyone, not especially them.
Giving a contribution in exchange for the receiver giving one to you is illegal.
Yes – and?
This story isn’t one unless there’s more to it. If I were running for mayor, I’d still be a citizen and voter who wants to see a city council full of people I agree with, and vice versa. There’s nothing inherently malicious or untoward about that, except for those caught out explicitly trading donations. Per the article:
Moving on:
What are you on about?
I think the best ideas and practices come from an exchange of ideas from varied backgrounds and ideologies. With one party rule (here and in other places that are red one party rule) that exchange of ideas is greatly lessened as everyone seems to believe in one way to do things whether that way is effective or not.
There is nothing “one party” about the mayorial candidates if you care to actually read any of their positions.
One party to you must be anything left of Reagan.
Gonzalez is far different from Rubio who is far different from Mapps and Wilson is WAY different than the others.
You do not, in fact, have to take ideas from people who have bad ideas.
No, you don’t have to take the ideas you disagree vehemently with. However, defending ones ideas from others and pointing out actual flaws in the logic process (other than simply saying that idea is bad) or asking further questions of these bad ideas and other simply disagreeable ideas sharpens and improves ones own ideas and makes them better and hopefully more inclusive.
Thanks Jake. I’ve been out gardening as this rolled in. What a mess today. Obviously my take a few days ago was wrong.
One of my first thoughts was technical, the Small Donation folks at the city should have caught this before it started and nipped it in the bud. That’s what computers do well, and checking for reciprocity would have been a simple function.
My 2nd thought? We have to vote for someone, and I still favor several people on that list. If you have to rank sins, driving badly is a much, much, much greater offense to me than gaming rules.
Reciprocity is not, in itself, a problem; it’s the collusion.
But given that this is our first rodeo, and there was lots of public chatter about the tactic ahead of time, the small donation folks probably should have warned candidates about this.
It’s the optics. Probably reciprocal donations should have been tracked, noted. Sometimes just tracking something will cause self-regulation.
The optics are a political issue; the collusion is a legal one. My guess is that those who engaged in the scheme did not realize it was illegal (though they should have).
Rescinding their qualification seems an appropriate punishment.
Completely agree that votes need to be made and someone is going to win, hence my heartfelt wish that this election cycle will turn out for the best.
It will be interesting to see when the dust settles if the reciprocity (or collusion) will be determined to be a bug or a feature and if anyone in authority will have the courage to make that determination.
The only candidate that has ridden a bike 60 years is Michael O’Callaghan. He started a free food program with a bike and trailer that gave away 17 million lbs of food on a zero budget with 82 vollunteers. He has 6 little cost housing solutions and more go to mayormikeoc.com for much more
I don’t know why speeding tickets from 1998 are relevant. That’s a loooooong time ago.
Meahwhile what the hell is going on in Rubio’s life? I’ve been here 22 years and am the proud recipient of exactly 0 parking tickets. It’s not difficult to follow the rules, presuming that you care about them. And you’d think someone in public office would care… I’m not seeing that here.
I’ve lived here 4 years and have gotten 2 parking tickets – both my fault. Concern over multiple parking tickets depends in part on what they’re for – parking in handicapped spaces is far worse than not paying meters. I care more about moving violations, and respect for the whole process – once you get the ticket pay it. Like other commenters above I was thinking Rubio was the least bad option of the 3 councillors running – I was going to put her #2 on my ranked choice after Wilson. Rethinking that now.
Keith Wilson remains the best choice before, and after these scandals/events.
Generally agree with this post.
As much as I don’t care for Gonzales, it does feel a bit disingenuous to go into that much detail on his record and leave out Rubio’s six suspensions of her license in addition to other details like the recency of her infractions.
I say this as someone who was previously planning to rank her first, as the clear “adult in the room.” Unfortunately that impression is now shattered. Not the behavior of an adult, and certainly not the behavior of a leader.
As for Mr. Gonzales, we already knew he didn’t fit that description either.
Whatever his other shortcomings, at least Gonzalez has experience using transit and bikes to get to work. That’s hardly a decisive factor, but it’s worth noting in contrast to some of his opponents.
Remember that even a suspended license (multiple times!) didn’t inspire Rubio to take MAX to work…. she kept driving, instead.
Exactly. It really paints a picture of someone who is addicted to driving, even when she is a danger to those around her.
I lived in Portland for over 17 years (1997-2015) and saw several city councilors in the press for moving and parking violations, so your hope for finding leaders to improve driving culture is I think a pointless exercise in futility. I think a better solution is to imitate the long-term solutions other like-sized cities have found to improve street safety, some of which you’ve touched on over the years, particularly the transportation district-forming in Ghent – making it difficult to drive between districts and go fast on any street, focusing faster traffic onto major arterial stroads and expressways.
If only we had an active Police department who doesn’t hold the city ransom when their feelings get hurt over silly politics. How about we go after the Police Union? Completely corrupt and extremely worthless.
I think that it needs to be asked how many of these drivers were under the influence or not if the right mind?
I wish that there was more follow up in this arena, and more honest coverage about this issue.
The people driving on paths are not your average mom, dad, or person. The person crashing into stores isn’t just some poor unfortunate soul. Most of them have many priors, or are driving cars in disrepair, or cars that aren’t even theirs. However, because of the more sensitive culture we’ve created around the stops that are just for this reason we’ve hampered our ability for early intervention.
It shouldn’t just be about road diets and adding bike lanes. We should be focusing much more on targeted interventions and preventative interventions that restore a sense of law and order to the road. Fatalities were lower pre-pandemic when we had more drivers, less bike routes, and less road dieting. We still need the latter, but it clearly is not as important as restoring etiquette and order to the roads.
Maybe not, but I honestly feel most threatened by the casual indifference and bad behavior of these average moms, dads and other people. I’ve never been around when someone has crashed into a store, but I am subject to aggressive and dangerous behavior of average-looking people almost daily.
How do you plan to restore etiquette without meaningfully changing the physical environment that permits bad behavior? What interventions will make the late-for-school-dropoff parent look both ways before turning right on red? Or actually stop their car at a stop sign before plowing into the sidewalk? Or not block the clearly marked ADA ramp instead of driving around the corner to one of many actual parking spots? People behave poorly in cars. We absolutely need infrastructure that can prevent bad behavior, and minimize the consequences for vulnerable road users.
I get feeling threatened by the casual indifference. That’s why I suggest enforcement action becoming a priority again. All of your examples of indifference won’t particularly be solved by changes to design alone. Like I said, pre-pandemic the indifference was lower. We also didn’t have a ton of road redesigns like we have been seeing now. There is a significant difference in the fact that drivers know that chances of being caught are low.
Nowhere did I say we shouldn’t continue to change roads. I simply said that shouldn’t be our only focus, and that we need to significantly increase advocacy for an increased blanketing of our streets with speed cameras, red light cameras, roaming speed vans, etc. We need to see every single car get a ticket for their parking infractions.
We had less issues when conscientiousness was high and road design was low. We’re having more issues with low conscientiousness and improving road design. The pattern and solution is incredibly clear. Look at division. That whole stretch of division was redone. Because drivers know no one is watching them, issues persist. Road design and redesign of every single street in Portland will take decades. We can make things way safer in the meantime by putting a god damn target on the forehead of every driver who thinks they can get away with lawlessness because no one is watching
To use your examples, what reasonably feasible infrastructure will make drivers look both ways before turning right on red (or exiting a driveway onto a busy street)? Or stop their car at a stop sign? Or not block ADA ramps?
Infrastructure can help in some cases, but it will take real enforcement or a shift in public opinion to change behavior en masse.
I generally see better behavior at traffic lights that are marked “no turn on red” and have bike boxes. An example is eastbound on Rosa Parks at MLK. It’s not a 100% reduction, but definitely improved. A counterexample is NE 21st southbound at Fremont where there is no bike lane, no bike box, and I routinely see cars go over the sidewalk to squeeze a right turn on red. I think we’d see better behavior if there was a bike lane here, and add flexy posts within say 15ft of the light. At the very least this would reduce the turning radius for drivers, so even when they don’t look, at least now they’re moving slower.
As for stop signs, its not necessarily a solution to get people to stop, but I’d strongly prefer to see traffic circles in place of 4 way stops in most cases. Daylighting (I know not everyone likes this term) can help too. Many intersections would benefit from physical infrastructure preventing cars from parking too close to the intersection. Again, not a 100% improvement in behavior, but people are more likely to stop for someone crossing the street when they can see them approaching (example NE Going at 42nd). Also, paint more crosswalks (on both sides of the street for Pete’s sake!) to make it apparent where the stop line is supposed to be.
Curb extensions for ADA ramps would be nice, but this one is largely a personal gripe since there’s one I depend on daily to get my cargo bike down to street level that is constantly blocked even though there’s plenty of parking just around the corner.
I’m not opposed to enforcing basic traffic laws either. I just think if we want to rely on cultural shifts in mindset to have safer streets, we’re going to end up with some pretty dangerous streets.
I’d support most/all of those ideas, though I think they would mostly help at the margins. Things like curb extensions are great because they improve pedestrian safety without needing to control what drivers do.
As I’ve said many times before, we need an all-of-the-above approach to get things back under control. It sounds like we agree on that.
I was going to vote for Gonzalez, but now I can’t vote for either of them. That type of conduct as an adult shakes my confidence in their ethics and decisionmaking.
You’re more likely to see a unicorn than to get a traffic ticket from PPB. Those two must’ve been consistently reckless.
I wish you didn’t give any more credit to the person(s) placing those stupid “NOTICE…” posters (lots of different messages on them) all over the place. They are all over the waterfront and just as bad as the graffiti. They are on the Steel Bridge, Hawthorne Bridge, Eastside Esplanade, Waterfront Park, etc. I don’t care who it is, but they do not get the right to plaster their messages/tags all over public property in pretty much the same way we generally don’t like those narcissist graffiti tags covering road signage, bridges, sidewalks, etc. The same people being paid with taxpayer funds to clean up graffiti are having to clean these off our public spaces. Please consider avoiding any more coverage of tags contributing to the destruction of our public places.
Hi JR.
I don’t see this as giving anyone “credit.” I’m not in this business to ignore reality. It’s a sign in public. Unsanctioned or not, it’s interesting and I think relevant to the content it accompanies. Thanks for your feedback.
You’re amplifying the poster’s message and potentially encouraging their proliferation. If you want to, that’s your prerogative as the owner of this blog. Fair enough. These posters are glued to concrete and other surfaces and difficult for city staff, property owners, and contractors to remove, whether or not you agree with this or any of the other messages done by this person(s). I think you could’ve made your point with any other image associated with parking tickets? Thanks for letting me rant.
I kind of agree. I hate these signs and could never think of this person as an “artist.” I’d much rather look at graffiti for that matter. The signs are low-brow-banksy-wannabe rubbish.
They remind me of the PDX Transformation traffic cones and signs, made to look official or even put in by some utility, kind of clever really.
I think this is just the reflection of the lawlessness in Portland today. All those years of blm and antifa running wild with no consequences instructs peoples actions. Why follow the rules? Do this little exercise, check the cars in any parking lot, many have old registrations from years ago. So they aren’t paying the fee and more likely don’t have insurance either.
Thanks for the laugh. Ha! Yes, Antifa and BLM made Gonzalez break the law.
What is your source?
Source: Gonzalez campaign supporter b*ll sh*t.
Let’s pass a ballot measure requiring all elected officials in the city to bicycle, walk, skateboard, wheelchair roll, or take public transit. We can save them from their own scandals, improve their health, reduce traffic, *and* likely improve policymaking for active transit once they realize how much more we need to do to support those who get around these ways.
I mean no offense, but would suggest caution when using the area of 158th and Division as an example. I have lived near that area for over 20 years and the way people cross that road is beyond unbelievable. There are signalized crosswalks at 160 and 157 (3 whole blocks apart) but people dart through cars between blocks to get back and forth from the convenience (smokes and beer) store on the north side and the apartments on the south and there are two bars right there as well. I agree that people are driving like idiots (due to lack of consequence)] but not every ped vs car is due to car bad, and as a person with many years of driving and a clean record I think they need to make more effort to get and keep bad drivers off the road and let the rest of go about our business in peace.
Why are these people involved in public governance? What are they getting out of it? If there a salary attached to the council member offices? Cause i wouldn’t think such immature and irresponsible behavior would be a match for selfless volunteering of time and effort
In Oregon, citizens may report traffic offenses. Note the time, date and location. Note the description of the vehicle, license number and description of driver. You must appear in court
Provide this information to the District Attorney and perhaps some one will take action. When I attempted to do this in Multnomah County, the telephone operator would not direct me to anyone because she did not know to whom to direct me. When I made a report in Deschutes County, the ADA treated me as a fool until the DA told him to take the report. If enough citizens make reports, perhaps the District Attorneys will make systems that process these reports .
Once again another biased and poorly written article by Jonathan. No metrics, only examples he “heard about” that support his opinion. Mingus Mapps has a reputation for being inconsistent in his policy and rhetoric, and locals know this and see this. Those bike lanes that we need “…drive everyone crazy” in Mingus’ words. I love Bike Portland, but I’m getting sick of these echo-chamber articles, man.
You do understand how hyperlinks work, right? Everything mentioned is supported with a link. Can you justify Rubio’s 150+ citations?
What has Gonzalez said about bike lanes? Rubio?
…..
Crickets
The title clearly says “Opinion” in big bold letters.
Guess what is missing in Oregon that is present in almost every other state in the nation? Drivers Education in Public Schools. Not only does it teach important safety protocols and defensive driving but also the civic duty of driving responsibly.
Used to have it. I did mine in Clackamas High School
Driving culture definitely needs to change–Jonathan are videos and politicians modelliing it really enough to do the job?
For that matter Oregon’s drug culture needs to change–its not ok to use drugs every day–it causes depression–the weather gives enough of that.
The free for all we have created in this city is, IMO due to a lack of consequences and a lack of personal responsiblity–I know I sound about 80.
I personally believe its time for some more traffic stops–thats my opinion–I work for myself–I don’t love any of our politicians. Its my beleif and I”m not part of some conspiracy.
Everyone who disagrees with me is also entitled to their opinion and not part of some conspiracy.
Oregon is one of 19 states that doesn’t require Drivers Ed at all, it’s hardly accurate to say that “almost every other state in the nation” has drivers ed in public schools. I took Drivers Ed in Wisconsin, but it wasn’t something offered through my public school. I couldn’t find any evidence that Drivers Ed is commonly taught in public schools anywhere in the US.
I would generally agree that US Driving requirements are not nearly stringent enough, but that education only plays a partial and minor role in the way drivers act. When the entirety of the built environment of almost the entire country favors motorists above all else, it’s not surprising that drivers act dangerously towards others. Our infrastructure is so forgiving for drivers (wide lanes, shoulders, etc.) that it’s just normal to act recklessly regardless of the situation. Education can play a role in that, but it will always be fighting an uphill battle without other changes
Which is a shame. A long time ago (I hesitate to say how long ago exactly) every sophomore at my HS had social studies and the first semester was drivers ed where we watched Red Asphalt, were tested on the drivers handbook and finally came in on the weekend where 3 of us at a time would drive the safety car with the teacher (the car also had brake pedals on the passenger side) and then waited eagerly for our 16th birthday where we’d go to the big “city” and take our drivers test. The school instructed us on how to be good drivers and I think we should go back to that if we could. By my senior year I was cycling the 12ish miles to school and being the only cyclist had to ask a teacher if I could lock my bike in a closet as there wasn’t anywhere else to put it.
On the one hand, I think driver’s education is in a sorry state and partially responsible for the current road crisis, but I also feel like having everyone take drivers ed in an existing class reinforces that a car is needed in society. Sort of place dependent I guess, but I didn’t get a license until I was 22 because I didn’t need it until then. I certainly got lots of incredulous looks from my peers in college (mostly from suburbia), but this experience really did shape my life in a way that probably led me to write lots of comments on BikePortland.
So I guess I feel like Drivers Ed should be freely offered and taught, but not required. Maybe as an after school program of sorts.
I still think its a good idea to mandate transportation education and it has value in teaching students on what will be a large part of their lives. However, the old way of only drivers training could and should absolutely be expanded to include bicycle mechanics, learning the city’s bus and any train or trolley routes, the benefits of rail and cycling, the value of car sharing as well as a history of transportation and how amazingly old bicycles are. Basically a full on transportation class to provide options and a solid foundation for the students.
Transportation is incredibly important and people need to be exposed to all the options and not just driving in a serious and scholastic manner.
I grew up in a very rural area of far northern California and bikes were for children or if an adult wanted to ride with their kids. I needed my license at 16 to drive into town to work my first corporate (fast food) job as my parents had determined that working odd jobs at the local farms wasn’t enough. So you are right, different times and different places. I didn’t really think of cycling as transportation until I met someone from Fresno who cycled a lot and it caused me to be the sole cyclist at the HS my senior year. It would have been a lot better to have learned about cycling, maintaining my bike and everyone else seeing it as a legit means of transportation during school.
Jonathan i share both your frustration on recent dangerous/reckless driving incidents in the news (some of which led to serious/fatal injuries) and disappointment on our two leading mayoral candidates breaking traffic laws with impunity.
Where you lost me was in asserting that simply making more “car free” zones and constraining drivers is a solution. As you pointed out, some of the recent incidents included
– Cars driving on car-free paths
– A driving plowing into the front door of a Plaid Pantry (obviously a car-free zone)
Thus one could assert simply making more car-free zones isn’t going to stop those that obviously have contempt for such laws and zones to begin with.
What we need is law enforcement, accountability and consequences for those that have taken advantage of all our Portland compassion. Currently there is a perception that law breakers and reckless drivers can get away with anything. As no one will enforce the rules or if they are cited/arrested the DA/judges will show them leniency if not drop charges. This perception needs to end now.
I am still annoyed that Wheeler was taking city council calls as he was driving around in his car.
Rubio did the same, and remember that Wheeler is not running for Mayor.
From my perspective, folks’ driving got much worse during Covid. There was very little traffic enforcement, the state didn’t require people to renew their tags, and the roads gradually descended into armed and angry anarchy. Pardon me, I mean drunk, armed, and angry anarchy.
The examples of Rubio (in particular), and Gonzalez are disappointing. However the fact is driving got worse because there were fewer police officers pulling people over and citing and/or arresting them. As imperfect as law enforcement is, we need them to enforce the law.
Rubio’s massive numbers are even more impressive given the lax enforcement in Portland. I honestly don’t know how it is possible to rack up 150+ citations in this city, unless you literally just park wherever you please, never feed the meter, etc.
For a bike riding mayor vote mayormikeoc.com. he also has 6 housing solutions. Check him out
Is he you?
Crazy drivers out there! Ironically, the only time I’ve ever been threatened with violence in 45 years of riding my bike in Portland was by another bicyclist on the old Sellwood Bridge when it was closed to motor vehicles for repairs, the guy was quite drunk and spat in my face before riding off, he thought I was trying to take his picture when I was simply looking at my phone. Cops couldn’t find him in River View Cemetery.
Makes me think of Not Just Bikes’ video: “These Stupid Trucks Are Literally Killing Us.” The stories in that video’s comment section are heartbreaking.
It’s not just the drivers, though that’s a big part. Giant vehicles becoming the norm for the everyday driver–even urban drivers–vastly increases the frequency and deadliness of crashes. It’s really scary being in bike lanes (a.k.a. “bike gutters”) with those large vehicles driving by.
It’s culture, it’s enforcement, it’s infrastructure, and it’s the type of vehicles on the road.
I am completely unsurprised that a bunch of people who remain silent and complicit in the genocide of fellow humans around world can behave the way they do on our streets. There is deep nihilism, apathy and cynicism in people these days and many of them have access to dangerous weapons including cars and guns. When will voices of conscience be raised?