Once I read City Council District 1 candidate Terrence Hayes’ recent fundraising email to supporters titled, “Portland’s War on Cars,” I knew I had to sit down and talk with him. In this interview, I share my concerns about the way he chose to frame our transportation challenges and Terrence explained why he wrote it. But that was just the start of an interesting conversation that included exchanges on everything from the future of 82nd Avenue (he supports a dedicated bus lane) to policing (he wants more boots on the ground), local politics (he says progressives in his race are flip-flopping on public safety), and more.
Among a field of nearly 100 candidates in the coming election, Hayes stands out. Not only is he the cousin of Quanice Hayes, the 17-year old who was murdered by a Portland Police Bureau officer in 2017; but Terrence served nearly 13 years in prison for shooting someone in the leg in 2003. Since then, Hayes has established a successful business and has become a community leader in gun violence prevention.
Given that past, it’s a bit surprising that he’s very proud to be endorsed by the Portland Police Association, the union that represents Portland Police Bureau officers. He also wants to add hundreds of new police officers to Portland streets as a key part of his public safety platform. That stance, and the endorsement of City Commissioner and mayoral candidate Rene Gonzalez, has put Hayes in an interesting political position in traditionally progressive Portland.
For a few highlights of the conversation, check out this video on Instagram or read a few key exchanges below…
About that “War on Cars” email:
“Well, you know, we always want to capture folks’ attention and anytime you say something like that, you’re going to capture attention… Remember, I’m always speaking from an east Portland point of view. When I’m talking to folks in east Portland, what they’re always complaining about is our lack of sidewalks, our lack of paved roads and safe roads. And they really feel that the biking and all that, got ahead of the other things in transportation that they would have liked to focus on because most of them commute to work, commute to schools, commute to the grocery stores — and a lot of them was long commutes.
I’m simply talking about prioritization. When our transportation is safe, our buses, when we have more bus routes, when we have more MAX routes, right? Especially from east Portland into the city — then we actually can create pathways for less cars and safer for bikers.
And so, no! I don’t want faster cars. I got kids, man! I don’t want people dying and getting hurt. But what I do want us to approach infrastructure in our roadways holistically. I’m using the words to challenge everybody.
So kick my tail and hold me accountable. But when you look out of a lens of east Portland, we’re still looking at the difference between the privilege of biking in relation to people that work from home, people that can afford, in whatever way, to not have to drive a car, drive their kids to school, drive for work, school and groceries. Right. So I’m looking through a particular lens. Bridge building don’t always mean you don’t say the tough things. It just means you’re present to hear everybody out. No one can never accuse me of not hearing you out.”
Do you support a dedicated transit lane or a high-priority transit lane on 82nd Ave?
“For sure. Again, I’m going to die on a hill that 82nd itself has always — and should always — look very vibrant and interconnected.”
Your 17-year-old cousin was murdered by a Portland Police officer, and now you’re not only endorsed by their union (PPA), but you also support putting more officers on the street?
“Yes because if the national data says that we’re behind on officers, the amount of officers you need to create a safe city, no matter my personal emotion towards the action of an officer, it doesn’t change the data. Now you have to understand that when we took this loss as a family, what we’ve always demanded was better training, better decision making and policy change. If you look at what happened with my family and what we said publicly, we never became an abolitionist family because of this trauma. We’ve decided police are not going nowhere. We’re not having that discussion with people. What we want to talk about is getting better versions of policing.”
What have you seen from the PPB that gives you hope?
“It’s because I have the same hope for them that I have in anybody that’s caused harm. That they can do better. And because I humanize people. Again, there’s not an example for me as a Black man that I can’t point to all segments of American culture where they’ve caused harm to Black folks, right? And so for me, I’m looking at PPA and I’m saying, ‘Y’all need somebody who’s going to be honest, be clear, and still have your best in mind. And I think I can be that person.
But let’s be clear about something: I love my community. I’m doing this for my community.
Black people didn’t want to ‘defund’. We wanted to define. I’m talking to people in the Black community and they’re saying, we never asked for this. We just want it to be treated well. So I actually bring that voice. I have not varied. I have not compromised. I have not become a different version of myself when I did my PPA endorsement.
I said ‘My cousin was killed by an officer and I never want to see a young black man down the barrel of a police officer.'”
When talking about policing, I’m seeing what are considered progressive candidates in your race, when asked, ‘Do you want more police or not?’ they don’t say, ‘No.’ I think that is a really interesting change from previous years…
“The folks in my district that are more progressive was definitely pushing for defunding and everything else during that time. So they can politically change up if they want to. But when you start looking at the track record, it’s political suicide. They’re pivoting because they don’t want to have to answer for those positions that they built their heels on two or three years ago. They are pivoting because we were wrong as a city and we made a lot of decisions as a city that has caused more harm. Instead of defining, we defunded.”
How are you different than Rene Gonzalez?
“I think my lived experience makes me different. What I like, and where me and Rene meet in the most healthy way to me, is public safety. Being willing to make the hard decisions about public safety, willing to consider that both public safety — in a sense of accountability and restorative justice — should be something that’s on the table at all times. But I’m different because my lived experience will always lean me towards the compromise more than a very hard stand on anything.
I do like Rene. I think he’s an organic leader. It doesn’t mean I’m going to agree with you on everything.
And I think in the extremity of politics in our city we’ve created an extremity: either we agree on everything or we agree on nothing. And I just don’t live in that world.”
Just before he voted in support of the Portland Clean Energy Fund, Rene Gonzalez said: “Deeply embedded in this ordinance is… permanent racial grievance. And as a frame of a public policy going forward, I question if that’s the way we should be defining issues.” Do you agree with that?
“No, I don’t. I don’t agree that it doesn’t always have a place. I certainly believe it has a place.”
On what’s next for Portland:
“Listen, we got the WNBA coming, right? Caitlin Clark, hate her or love her, she done brought something new to this space. We all talking about it. We talking about a baseball team in our city. Come on, man! As we bring finances back to our city, we won’t have to fight about bike lanes or sidewalks. We just have the money. We can tax folks, get the money, and we can do both/and right? I want to be a both/and candidate. I know I’m gonna’ get my butt kicked sometime when I say things, but if you listen to the heart of what I’m saying, I am a both/and candidate.”
— Listen to the full episode in the player above or wherever you get your podcasts. The video below features the same exchanges shared above.
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.
This is going to be a tough listen for many in the Bike Portland crowd. You know the college-educated White Saviors who think their “police are evil racists,” “capitalism is the devil,” and “cars are demonic attitudes make them anti-racist.” They seem to fancy themselves allies of the blue-collar POC in East Portland. But if they can take a step back, check their privilege, and really listen, they might start to see that their BLM sign in front of their cute Portland craftsman doesn’t do much for the people Mr. Hayes represents. In fact, it might do more harm than good.
This isn’t about guilt or shame; it’s about understanding. It’s time to expand your horizons and recognize that allyship isn’t just a trend or a badge of honor—it’s a commitment to engaging with the real issues facing our communities. So, take a listen. Dive deeper. You might find that true solidarity requires more than just slogans; it demands action and genuine connection.
What you are saying is true for the most part. But I would go further and say I think we should have built the bike lanes close in and not used equity as a guide for where bike lanes went into East Portland, it should have been where they were going to be used and wanted.
East Portland is just very car centric.
It was a car oriented culture back in the 1960s when East Portland was the white flight refuge for suburban families wanting to flee inner city Portland neighborhoods. It is a still a car oriented culture today even though it’s more blue collar now. Even though the demographics have changed, the auto centric suburban lifestyle has not.
It’s almost as if you build a transportation system that is hostile to everything except cars, people will prefer cars.
This is certainly a factor, though we know that many people prefer cars even where alternatives abound.
The question is how to change that preference in a way that people will respond to positively.
Except your history is a bit “off”. East Portland had painted bike lanes on all its arterial stroads long before much of Portland did, in the 1980s before annexation, put in by Multnomah County. They also had signed “bike routes” on neighborhood streets such as Market, Mill, Millmain, and Main Streets, 135th, and so on, plus the offstreet paths along I-205, I-84, and the Springwater. The county published bike maps in the late 80s, they are worth looking at.
There were lots of “white flight” suburbs of high-value homes with sidewalks, independent water systems, and nice schools in East Portland, no denying that, but there also a lot of “white trash” suburbs of septic systems, low taxes, lousy schools, and no sidewalks. All those neighborhoods were annexed into Portland 1986-1991 and the city proceeded to “shove” or negligently allow as many displaced inner Portland and new residents into East Portland, effectively doubling its population, without adding more services and infrastructure.
Your history is a little “off”. Bike lanes were installed in East Portland on 102nd, 122nd, 136th, 148th, Division & Fremont in the early/mid 1990’s by the City/PBoT. Burnside was part of the MAX construction in the late 80’s, others have come more recently. If there were any Multnomah County-installed bike lanes west of 162nd (the current approximate City boundary) I’m not recalling them.
A lot of the bike lanes were built close in. It’s not like us college educated elites working from our cute craftsmans don’t use our political representation to get bike lanes leading to said cute craftmans (craftpeople?). I’m avoiding my WFH job right now in my home office overlooking a protected bike lane in N Portland, although my house is not technically a craftsman. That Mr. Hayes finds poking us in the eye (for supporting the development of bike infrastructure in East Portland) a profitable strategy for attracting support to his candidacy is dismaying but not surprising. The strategy is time-tested and still employed close in (c.f. Jonathan’s recent interview of Tiffani Penson, who is running in D2). Like our vice president, East Portland “happened to turn Black” a number of years ago. Now that it’s the perceived center of oppression, we see a reprise of disingenuous political arguments about E PDX that are well-known (and still impeding the formation of urgently needed political alliances) closer in.
I actually think this strategy you cite, if it is a strategy rather than a reflection of opinions held by many people, is racially neutral.
White and black people in East Portland both voice the opinion that the road treatments have done nothing but make their lives more complicated.
However with the increase in apartment blocks, car-less households and poverty in East Portland something HAD to change.
All of these things can be true and I think every single person who pays attention to this issue can agree on that.
But could that have been addressed with more frequent signalled crossings rather than this jumble of narrowed streets, unexpected concrete in the roadway and weird painted stuff whose ever changing meaning and design seems to confuse every driver?
Hi donel! Thanks for the reply. I don’t doubt that many White EP residents feel that bike improvements are a low priority. I imagine many see bike lanes as unwanted woke garbage even if they desire/support better walkability. OTOH, I think almost everyone that advocates for improved bike infrastructure would also like to improve walking. And, as has been pointed out in this comments section, an effective way to make walking safer is to ‘calm’ (i.e. reduce the travel speed) of auto traffic. I can’t really comment on the specifics of EP bike lanes because I don’t ride (or drive) there much.
It’s interesting, in talking to my black neighbor (who owns rentals for his family’s income, must be one of those “evil landlords”), he has some of the same issues with crime, houseless squatting on his properties, dangerous streets, etc. that I have.
This goes so against the narrative the SJW at my work say just can’t be possible. It’s almost as if the SJWs are trying to get the groups to conflict with each other and stay separate than trying to bring people together.
I’d be interested to hear about your “genuine connection” and “action” you’ve taken in solidarity with the Black community outside of posting this comment on bikeportland?
Reality does’t care what people think. The evidence shows what roads are dangerous in Portland. Evidence shows how to engineer roads to make them more safe. Making the road narrower and making it multi-modal contributes to that. That’s just reality. Terrence is in the “safe and fast” roads camp whether he acknowledges it or not and there is no such thing as a fast and safe road.
As for the police, I truly hope Terrence doesn’t have a “I can change him” mentality about PPB. I can’t imagine anyone at this point thinking that PPB has any capacity for change.
“I’d be interested to hear about your “genuine connection” and “action” you’ve taken in solidarity with the Black community outside of posting this comment on bikeportland?”
I put up a Black Lives Matter sign in my window. What did you do?
I don’t know Elijah but my feel from his comments is that he is part of Black community. Did you even consider that possibility before asking for some sort of proof of his solidarity?
I had the opposite reaction, Windy. My immediate take was that the writer was a white, college-educated political operator. The stock-in-trade is tropes. Most people aren’t even aware that the buttons Elija was pushing exist. But it doesn’t matter, I love politics!
Know what I love? Not having good-faith policy discussions derailed by paid “political operators” posting dog-whistle talking points. But hey, it drives up site traffic, which is apparently all that really matters around here.
I don’t have a BLM sign in my yard, but I’m deeply troubled by the number of pedestrian fatalities in east Portland. How many pedestrian deaths are acceptable so your average driver can save 2 minutes on their commute. Should we accept more deaths so they can save 5 minutes on their commute?
These high-speed roads are also killing drivers, many of whom are low income/minority. Is this acceptable? When you say that our city policies do more harm, what kind of harm are you talking about?
https://www.portland.gov/transportation/vision-zero/annual-deadly-traffic-crash-report
How exactly do BLM signs “do more harm than good”? Do no black people support BLM? Insinuating that black people are just a political monolith seems pretty racist TBH.
Car transportation is inherently frustrating and is an easy way for candidates to make vague proclamations to stir up support. Same with “crime.” Candidates can point to a bright green bike lane and say “This bike lane is why you feel sad.” They can point to a tent and say “if I make this tent disappear, homelessness will be solved.” Hayes may think he is being a savvy politician, but he looks foolish.
I can see why this candidate is aligned with Rene. Rene has based his whole platform on offering unrealistic solutions to ill-defined grievances. Hayes griped about bike lanes and then said he’s a “both, and, candidate.” As in, he likes to have it both ways, and will say whatever he thinks will get him elected. He has aligned himself with efforts to dismantle police oversight and he claims that he is going to hold police accountable. He’s going to gripe about bike lanes and he’s going to buy everyone a bike lane when we’re all rich because we hid all of the homeless people in jails. uggh.
“Instead of defining, we defunded.”
No one defunded the police. Portland’s police budget is at record highs.
There was a very brief shifting of a little money towards providing services the police were in charge of to other people providing that service, but that’s it. Anyone who claims the police were defunded is repeating a falsehood.
We defunded, then reversed course. The rhetoric at the time made it clear what it was.
That handy chart you link to references population vs. police funding but completely ignores inflation. How convenient.
Let’s apply this to some other industries:
Kroger budget for employee compensation at record highs! I can’t believe they are striking!Boeing budget for employee compensation at record highs! I can’t believe they are striking!etc
The budget in 2000 was $152.4mm which adjusted is $244mm in 2024 dollars. The police budget is $261mm.
It’s both at record highs and inflation-adjusted record highs.
https://www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=5739
https://www.portland.gov/cbo/2023-2024-budget/documents/fy-2023-24-adopted-budget-volume-1-citywide-summaries-and-bureau/download
And our population is up about 8% since the year 2000, so that 7% budget increase seems appropriate. It actually should be a bit higher if we want to maintain the same service levels
So not ‘defunded’’, but funded at a similar level. But I keep hearing all this braying about how we need more cops.
“But I keep hearing all this braying about how we need more cops.”
We have fewer cops per capita than just about any other city our size. We don’t have enough cops to answer the 911 calls they get.
Those two facts suggest we don’t have enough police.
Hee haw.
The position that we should hire more po-po is a reasonable one, but it is incumbent upon proponents of this position to explain why an INCREASE in real historical funding is needed. In particular, I would hope similar levels of accountability that PCEF skeptics like yourself insist on for PCEF grantees is required for additional funds going to the police. The standard line is that we need to reverse ‘defunding’, but this is not the case.
Again, if you adjust for population and inflation, police funding is basically flat over the last 25 years in Portland. Stop abusing data to try and make a point.
Pointing out that ‘basically flat’ funding is not ‘defunding’ is abusing the data? OK.
Overall funding can be flat and cops could have been defunded if council subsequently reversed course and restored funding. Which is exactly what happened.
OK. Cops were defunded and subsequently refunded. What I’m contesting is the narrative that the ‘defund’ movement lead to a severe cop shortage. Which is a common narrative that is pushed in reactionary circles.
Can you flesh out that narrative a bit? Can you present what you think the strongest version of the argument in support of that narrative is, even if you disagree with it?
Sure. Here is what I think right wingers would argue.
A Bedtime story for Watts
Once upon a time, in the great awokening, well meaning liberals, largely White and financially stable, were beguiled by left wing activists into believing that all the problems faced by minorities in American society were the direct result of a novelly invented kind of racism that is inherent in the Judeo-Christian conception of the US as a special place. These well meaning ‘allies’ joined with ungrateful street punks and leant their substantial political clout to fringe movements that scapegoated the core structural elements that make America a unique land of freedom and opportunity for people regardless of race. Chief among these scapegoats are those that safeguard our safety: the police and the justice system that backstops police authority.
What ensued was a disastrous political realignment that unfairly denigrated the police as racist and blamed them for all sorts of problems they didn’t cause. It tied their hands by legally proscribing what they are allowed to do to keep us safe, and it let the dangerous people they arrested back out onto the street in a revolving door of criminality. One terrible consequence was ‘defunding’, where government funding was redirected from patriotic public servants with deep a reserve of street smarts to crazy college graduates who have been taught to hate America by by their atheist/communist/lesbian Black studies ‘professors’. These insurgents believe that criminals never deserve punishment — it’s not their fault, it’s society’s fault. The result is a predictable fall into chaos, where PDX, SF, Seattle, NYC, etc. become no-go zones for White Christians. Downtown is ruined, nobody wants to do business in or visit the city. Society begins to lose cohesion; rules are for suckers. There is open warfare in the streets. Buildings burn, and looting is common.
The cops, predictably, are demoralized by the constant protests, ubiquitous anti-cop graffiti, and the official rebuke implicit in defunding. They wonder who would want to try to save such a fallen city as PDX. But they are truly upstanding people that love their job (or at least their pension), and their undying patriotism allows a few hardy ones to weather the hatred and condescension spewed their way by the ungrateful punks and their pussy-hatted allies. Eventually, Rene Gonzalez rides in on a white steed, stiffens Ted Wheeler’s spine. Praise the Lord! Order begins to creep back into our beautiful city. But we desperately need to beef up the uniformed ranks, because Hardesty and Eudaly and the defund movement took away all their money. If we continue on our current path of venerating the cops, they will make Portland great again.There’s even a chance we could get a MLB team!
Dude! You left out the part about the woke mind-virus, which is my favorite part! And a whole section on Trump Derangement Syndrome!
The salient bit was this:
Do you disagree that this happened at all, or concede it happened but didn’t have an impact, or think it happened, had an impact, and we just need to hire thicker-skinned cops?
My opinion is that it happened and likely had some impact, but might be less important in explaining the current police shortage than the more general challenges of recruiting lots of new people following a wave of retirements, along with cop being an unglamorous and demanding job (physically and emotionally), combined with living in a time where it’s hard to hire people for a range of social-service jobs (nursing and mental health worker shortages as well among others).
Either way, we’re left in an undesirable situation.
PS One interesting observation: both you and John seem to have trouble laying out the strongest case against your points of view without resorting to sarcasm or excessive language. It’s a useful skill for thinking things through.
I think it’s an interpretation that is consistent with reality. I’m not in a good position to comment on cops’ feelings, but I don’t doubt that their grievance is sincere. I don’t think their grievance is justified, but that’s a different question. I agree that I don’t think it’s the whole story of the cop shortage. The police are symbolic of traditional power hierarchies in ways that few other social institutions are and so are really torqued by changing social norms (i.e. progress). I’m empathetic with them, but they need to realize that the world is changing for the better (‘We’re not going back.’)
Sarcasm is my armor. Thanks for the advice, I’ll start trying to formulate succinct opposing arguments.
It sounds like you are not so much contesting the possibility that our defunding experiment contributed to our current cop shortage as you are the notion that it is the single factor that explains everything.
I think we generally agree on this; the only difference would be that I think most cops want progress as well. Of course we’re talking about a big and varied group of people, so their feelings are probably not uniform on that (or any other) matter.
“it is incumbent upon proponents of this position to explain why an INCREASE in real historical funding is needed”
We don’t necessarily need more money, we need more cops. We have far fewer than we had in the past for a smaller population. I don’t fully understand the problem, but I know a lot of cops reached retirement age around the same time, and recruitment has fallen short.
I’m sure someone will respond with a snarky comment, but it is a real problem that could impact any of us at our moment of greatest need, most of all those living in high crime areas that rely on police protection more than the rest of us.
All of these facts are well known and have been reported on multiple times by a variety of media outlets, so I suspect you already understand the problem.
Portland’s population has shrunk 4.66% since 2020.
Sure, but that wasn’t the date range cyborg was referencing when he attempted to make the police budget look excessive above. Given the historical funding levels and adjusting for population change and inflation, it’s right about where it should be if we want consistent funding and staffing levels.
“Defunded” represents at this point a constellation of policy proposals and attitudes with the common theme being police play an outsized role in public safety. It is not only financial.
Thus “defunded” in this context can mean budget but also things like disbanding the gang and traffic enforcement teams which are things that definitely did happen.
This was an interesting interview and I think even the possibility of Mr. Hayes being elected is an indicator that charter reform is having its intended effect. I wouldn’t necessarily want him to be on the city council in its current format, but I think as 1 of 12 councilors he brings a lot to the table, as long as he is balanced against more progressive voice, bike advocates, etc. With that being said, there were a few things in this interview that stood out to me:
I have only known one city councilor who had a good grasp of transportation policy in Portland and that was Sam Adams a decade ago, and even then it took him years to get his grasp. I’ve seen several PBOT directors not have any sort of grasp of PBOT policy, let alone general transportation policy – even insiders have trouble grasping it, partly because it’s so hard to define and it keeps changing.
A lot of East Portland pedestrians don’t use the pedestrian islands and RFBs even when they are nearby. They also don’t use the 3 pedestrian bridges from the 80s at all, except to hang banners. Instead, many people walk across numerous busy lanes the same way they did in the countries they came from (or as Europeans do), they cross with the flow of traffic, usually mid-block – it’s actually quite safe if you know what you are doing – most people survive.
Outer Powell Boulevard is a special case. The bike lane and future sidewalk on the north side of the road are right on top of a huge water pipe (more like an aqueduct than a main), one of three passing through East Portland from Bull Run. As more parts of Powell get rebuilt (it’s all funded), the painted bike lanes will be replaced with cycletracks, protected bike lanes, and actual sidewalks, all courtesy of ODOT, before it gets turned over to PBOT so they can ruin it.
I ended up getting dinner on outer division, which got me curious to take a closer look, so I rode my bike out there this morning and I am much less charitably inclined to him now.
Basically all his complaints (both pedestrian islands and safety wands) seem like they are directed at the outer division project specifically, which, as far as I can tell the whole downside for drivers is that it is now slightly less convenient to make left turns (a cost which probably came with an associated increase in safety for drivers since those center turn lanes aren’t known as suicide lanes for no reason).
Basically any street that I saw that had bike lanes also had sidewalks that seemed like theywere installed at the same time, so I have now changed my opinion to “this is typical truck guy whining and also Mr. Hayes doesn’t know anything about transportation policy.” Heaven forbid someone driving has to think a little bit about where they are gonna turn
Terrance Hayes has a charisma that nobody else has in Portland politics, able to make everyone feel heard without committing to anything is a real talent. None of the current Mayoral candidates have it, they’re all weird and off putting (people who say Rene is a good communicator have set the bar supremely low). But here Hayes sort of got away with setting a framework that is very misleading that hides an unwillingness to take on drivers who kill pedestrians/those waiting for the bus. Who in the Bike community has been advocating AGAINST sidewalks in East Portland? They call this a “war on cars” in favor of bikes, when in reality it is the focus on supporting Cars and Driving over pedestrians/safety for people walking. Bike has little to do with that, and anyone I know that is an advocate for bikes is also one to advocate and say cars speeding down a strode with kids walking home from school without any sort of protection is BAD. It’s a zero sum politics to pit modest bike improvements against pedestrian improvements when really it is the baseline to favor the problem, dangerous car driving and people complaining about traffic.
Jonathan, I think you do good work. But this time it’s hard not to conclude that you got played. A candidate puts out a deliberately inflammatory message, hoping to generate outrage. By giving him a platform to spread his misinformed and half-baked ideas, you’re only rewarding that kind of outrage farming. Frankly I’m astonished that you would publish this even after Hayes admitted that he was basically trolling for attention. It would be one thing if Hayes were already elected and in a position to make policy. But every second of airtime you give this person could have been spent helping candidates with more sensible policies on transportation and road safety. And the laudatory tagline is just bizarre. If Hayes really can “take the heat”, maybe the heat needs to be turned up a notch. Just my two cents.
Hi Steven,
I disagree that I got played and I disagree in your perception of Hayes. What he says is a sentiment shared by a lot of people and while he’s certainly a good politician, I don’t think he was doing this as “outrage farming” — it’s a legit popular opinion! My job is to share positions and illuminate important perspectives that impact our spheres of transportation and cycling and I believe my work on Hayes does that.
Just because I might disagree with something personally and a position held by a candidate might not help make bicycling better, doesn’t mean I’ll act like that person or their beliefs don’t exist. I think that’s been a huuuuge problem with progressives in Portland. Too many folks want to cancel or silence opinions they don’t agree with! Hayes is a smart dude who I think accurately reflects many people in his district and I think our community deserves to be aware of these beliefs and the people who hold them. Thanks for your comment.
No one wants to believe they can be fooled, which is exactly what makes people so easy to fool. Whether this “war on cars” and “privileged bike riders” rhetoric is a needed contribution to transportation discourse is a matter of opinion (as if we haven’t heard similar things from every bikelash culture warrior in existence). But nobody is “canceling” Hayes. He’s been interviewed by most of the major local news outlets and is even quoted in Politico. Let’s not pretend that choosing to withhold even more free publicity is the same as silencing someone.