Advocates with local nonprofit BikeLoud PDX say city traffic engineers repeatedly shared concerns about removing traffic diverters in northwest Portland with other city officials, but a decision to remove them still moved forward.
The organization released documents today received through a public records (see below) request that show exchanges between transportation bureau staff and Public Environment Management Office (PEMO) staff. “These communications show the hidden process city leaders used to try to remove these diverters against the guidance of PBOT’s lead traffic engineer,” BikeLoud asserts. Below is more from a statement about the records just released by BikeLoud:
“A series of internal memos from the city traffic engineering and operations teams put it plainly.
Jan. 13: “We cannot remove these planters — they are addressing bike crashes that were occurring at this location.”
Jan. 29: “I have revisited this location with the Traffic Engineer and this diverter cannot be removed for safety reason.”
June 18: “The diverters are in place for good reason.”
These messages complicate the claims in City Manager Michael Jordan’s Aug. 11th letter on the subject. His letter said that PBOT “ultimately recommended” removing the diverters. But the only public record of this decision is from June 25th, which says, “It has been determined that the diverters will be removed. ETA TBD.” Decided by who? And how did they come to that conclusion?”
In a statement about these revelations, BikeLoud Chair Eva Frazier and Vice-Chair Kiel Johnson said,
“We understand the rationale of PEMO [Public Environment Management Office, the city office that spearheaded the removal plans] to work quickly to take care of community concerns and allow small adjustments to happen. But as people who rely on a safe bicycle network, it is frustrating to feel once again let down by our city’s leadership… After reviewing the City’s communications, we are concerned about our current leadership’s ability to execute council-approved policy with transparency and integrity.”
This new information from BikeLoud is important because PEMO made it seem like PBOT was supportive of the diverter removal plan.
It’s been nearly three weeks since Mayor Keith Wilson announced a pause in the City Administrator’s plan to remove two sets of diverters in Northwest Portland that create one-way traffic for drivers. When the plan was first exposed on August 1st, the community quickly rallied in support of the traffic calming devices due to their importance in creating safer neighborhood greenways and the fact that they were both installed as recommendations of a multi-year planning process.
The Portland Police Bureau and City Administrator’s office say NW 20th (at Everett) and NW Johnson (at 15th) must be returned to two-way auto traffic so that police officers can more effectively fight crime. But despite Central Precinct Commander Brian Hughes and City Administrator Mike Jordan issuing memos to lay out their arguments, Mayor Wilson has apparently stopped them from moving forward with the plans.
The City of Portland’s bicycle and pedestrian advisory committees have both issued statements opposing the diverter removal plan. The Pedestrian Advisory Committee letter stated, “We are troubled by the lack of transparency and engagement apparent in the process to arrive at a proposal removing this infrastructure,” and requested any movement of diverters be brought to their committee beforehand. And the Bicycle Advisory Committee penned a city council resolution stating their opposition to removing the diverters and said any plan to do so must go through a transparent, data-driven process.
At an August 20th meeting of the PEMO “Problem Solvers” network, PEMO Director Anne Hill attempted to dismiss concerns about the diverters. When several concerned Portlanders showed up to talk about the issue, she said the meeting was not the correct venue to discuss it. “If folks want to have a big discussion about bikes and how we patrol… You can have that meeting. That’s not what this meeting is.”
Hill went on to say, “I understand there’s a lot of misinformation. I understand that diverters became the name of what that was… it wasn’t diverters.”
I asked Director Hill via chat in that meeting to clarify why she didn’t think the meeting was the correct venue to express concerns about the diverters (since those meetings are where the diverters were initially discussed) and if she could expand on the “misinformation” allegation; but neither she nor anyone on her staff have bothered to reply.
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.
What a wild story, and a great reminder that my BikePortland subscription and BikeLoud membership is some of the best money I spend. Kudos to you both for getting and staying on top of this story; this is a tremendous public service at the end of the day.
What we haven’t heard yet is a single cogent reason for removing the diverter on 20th/Everett (much less the ones on Johnson, which aren’t located on or near the apparent “crime walk” between Freddy’s and Couch Park), but now we have evidence that multiple high-level Professional Engineers at PBOT believed the diverters were necessary. The fact that they were overruled has the alarm bells in my head absolutely screaming as a recovering traffic engineer myself.
It appears likely that a traffic engineer was “asked” to produce and stamp a drawing showing this intersection converted to four-way stop control, when they knew that such a configuration was a horrible idea. I feel awful for that engineer, who was asked to put their reputation on the line because someone had an axe to grind and probably lost multiple nights of sleep researching the extents of qualified immunity. No traffic engineer on the planet would think four-way stop control at that intersection is a good idea.
Whoever did the “asking” here is practicing engineering without a license, and is using the engineering stamp of a report to endorse/justify their bad decision. This is a BFD from an engineering ethics point of view. IMHO this person needs to be relieved of duties immediately and is disqualified from any position that supervises PEs.
There’s more that will come out here. What is the ultimate source of the complaints about these diverters and why did the city immediately jump when they were told? I for one am looking forward to hearing JM ask a few tough questions about this to the new mayor (who I am entirely unconvinced isn’t just the same person as the former mayor but with a similarly-cadenced alias and an updated haircut).
I think how this shook out is even worse. My read of the public comments is that the people demanding the removal realized that since the original diverters were part of a stamped plan set, and that PBOT engineers did not want them removed, they would have to come out via “work order.” This means that PBOT maintenance gets a description of a project that doesn’t need to get stamped by an engineer, so it’s kind of an end around to get the removal done.
Oh fascinating, you’re right. I didn’t pick up on this because I foolishly thought they’d have to do at least some of that pesky analysis and engineering work to justify the diverters’ removal even as they end-arounded the outreach process.
So how did the decision maker(s) here think this would ultimately play out? Were they hoping/assuming that their traffic engineers were just kinda wrong about frivolous things like intersection control and traffic safety? Especially if the plan here was indeed for a four-way stop, that…..Well, that would have represented an interesting test of a number of prevailing theories regarding stop control that most likely would have ended with a large lawsuit.
To me it just seems like every new iteration of city leadership insists on learning the embarrassing way that attempting to remove infrastructure in the shadows doesn’t actually work very well. This time happened to be Wilson’s and Jordan’s turns.
You have a D4 councilor who has antipathy to ped/bike infrastructure, a mayor who has promises to keep, and carbrained Pearl District suburbanite NIMBYs who have warped D4 power structures into a tool for their wishes. Plus a City Manager who was emplaced to make sure the Right People got their way, as usual, despite all the hoi polloi clogging up City Hall these days. A perfect storm of vested interests, and the impetus could have come from any of them. Other parties might have ‘seen their opportunities and took ’em. ‘
Just an anonymous anecdote, so grains of salt and all, but when I asked a person directly involved in this mess if it was a quid pro quo on NW shelters, i was told “that’s exactly what’s going on.” If true, Wilson should have been transparent about it from the get-go, but it explains his initial “no comment” reaction, and renders his BikePortland charm offensive worthy of a deeper look, Has he Come To Jesus on how stinky this looks, or is he blowing smoke? Can he persuade Jonathan that he’s a cyclist at heart and convince BP this is all for the best (an effort, I say he should have made initially). Smoothing the waves and getting some buy-in from the bike community would be a real Nixon to China win for Wilson.
What an outstanding comment! I’m hearing the same about the quid pro quo.
COTW
LOL Anne is so tight lipped about this, she has no one to blame but herself and her staff if she truly believes there is “misinformation”.
No one but Anne is spreading misinformation.
How much do we spend on PEMO every year? It doesn’t seem like they do much of anything at all:
https://www.portland.gov/pemo/results
FY 2025-26 Adopted Budget Book
Volume One: City Summaries and Bureau Budgets
https://www.portland.gov/budget/2025-2026-budget/development/adopted
Office of the City Administrator
City Administrator Service Area
Michael Jordan, City Administrator
$95,342,565
> Portland Solutions Operations
> $1,218,997
> 1.3%
> Portland Environmental Management Office
> $5,605,499
> 5.9%
I’m on the BikeLoud email list, and received their statement with a link to the spreadsheet of city emails obtained by their public records request a few hours ago. The damning email is on 6/18:
I’m assuming it’s PBOT Executive Leadership. Which really raises a bunch of questions about why “Executive Leadership” does not have the back of the City Traffic Engineer and PBOT’s Planning division (headed by Art Pearce). Shouldn’t the bureau be standing up for the work of the bureau?
Executive Leadership in most cities means the (elected) mayor and the (appointed) city manager, in Portland’s case the city administrator.
If you go home page of the Transportation Director’s Office the first of three “Featured Content” articles invites you to “Meet the Executive Team”. That page contains “Titles and bios for the Executive Team at the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT)”. The first is for “Millicent D. Williams – Director” Depending on what’s customary within the Bureau, “Executive Leadership” could mean the Executive Team collectively, or just the Director.
It’s also possible that it refers to City Administrator Michael Jordan whose own short biography on Portland.gov says he “Oversees all four deputy city administrators and programs in the executive office”.
Or it could be Mayor Wilson whose job description on the City web page titled “How does our form of government work?” says, “they lead the executive branch and have administrative authority.”
The phrase is ambiguous. I’d like some clarity as to exactly who made the final decision. It may have been Mayor Wilson, or he may not have been aware of it at all. Basic democratic accountability demands transparency on this.
On top of that PEMO and PPB presumably have their own “executive leadership”. When dealing with conflicts between various bureaus, my guess is that “Executive Leadership” is all of the above, the directors of various bureaus plus the mayor plus the city administrator – get them all into a room with all their aides and lock them up until they hash it out – because gosh knows what the public will say at those pesky wasteful public meetings…
It also includes Deputy City Administrator Priya Dhanapal who has drastically reduced the authority that the transportation director has.
After looking at the document from bikeloud, I think the entire Jan 13 comment by Rick Nys is even more damning
PBOT literally told PEMO they needed a public process before removing the diverters
The only person named Mark on PBOT’s “Meet the Executive Leadership” page is Chief Administrative Officer Mark Williams.
Thanks for the follow up. I really appreciate this reporting and how it’s exposed issues with the current structure and how the mayor can abuse his relationship with the city administrator to get things he wants done without buy in from the council.The original council approved these changes city wide over a decade ago the mayor shouldn’t be allowed to come in and fiddle with them without the current council’s knowledge let alone outright approval.
This was Mitch Green’s primary complaint at the BAC meeting last month; the city charter is clear that the Council is the traffic authority, and the Council has explicitly said that these diverters, as part of the NW in Motion program, need to be there. But who needs pesky legislative process when you have moneyed NIMBYs offering a quid pro quo to the Mayor or City Administrator?
Is there a phone number for PEMO? Their website only lists e-mail. I would like to at least be able to express in the record that Director Hill’s dismissal of people who took the time to attend the PEMO meeting is extremely inconsiderate given the amount of time people in the community have had to spent cleaning up this mess, not to mention actually dishonest.
*Public* Environment Management Office (PEMO)
lol yes I know. Did it correct 100 times before this. Thanks.
Jonathan, my last comment got eaten by the spam filter. I gotta remember to never use the Edit button. Could you rescue it, please?
done. Thanks for letting me know. Sorry it does that sometimes.
Are we surprised?
Good for BP and BL to revive this issue; I had a feeling PEMO and Jordan were hoping for all this to blow over and remove them when something else was in the news cycle. Or, long shot, Wilson realized how shitty and “Old Portland” this looked and is pulling back in order to avoid getting the muck on his political trousers. Unlike two D4 councilors one could name…
And good on Wendy Cawley! I was heartened when she was given this job, as she has done right by ped/bike users whenever she can.
I wish Portland did a better job of firing people (without golden parachutes) because it sounds like Jordan and Hill both deserve to be shown the door. This is a particularly unfortunate time to be undermining the democratic process, not to mention your own engineers, and then engaging in obfuscation to cover your tracks.
Articles like this are when BP is most valuable. Thanks also to BikeLoud for their work here in holding truth to power. Sounds like these PEMO meetings could use a consistent public presence for transparency – are they set up to be open to the public?
Jordan is only an interim administrator, and will be leaving at the end of the year. Who’s going to fire him? Hell, we just gave him a raise.
And yes, as far as I know, anyone can attend PEMO problem solver meetings.
https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2025/08/27/city-begins-search-for-permanent-city-administrator/
Yes, PEMO under pressure started posting the bare minimum to inform the public of the Problem Solvers meetings. Hope you are free in the middle of the week in the middle the day because thats when they hold them.
I didn’t remember any of this. According to the article in the Oregonian* announcing the hiring of Millicent D. Williams by Mingus Mapps:
Great. Working on the I-5 widening Interstate Bridge Project. So far, so usual. But this is really interesting:
Hahaha! What’s a little misappropriation of funds, right Mingus? Not at all relevant to the job. That’s some good old-fashioned Portland politics, there.
*Jayati Ramakrishnan. “Portland’s Transportation Agency, at Funding Crossroads, Gets a New Leader”. Oregonian. 14 July 2023.
Using nonprofit funds to advance the career and ego of politicians is as Portland as Voodoo Donuts and Powell’s Books.
“In a news release, Mapps described Williams as a “career public servant” and said he held an “open, competitive process””
I remember.
It was mind boggling that someone who pled guilty to committing crime and then covering it up was the best qualified for the position. Someone who flat out said “I am a criminal”. I mean, I understand the appeal of hiring someone who would do anything I wanted including crime and taking the fall, but come on!
.
Go PBOT!!!!
How can any city-wide plan be implemented when councilors will sell off bits and pieces for a few votes or a favor?
Councilors aren’t selling off anything. It’s the Mayor’s office, with cover from PBOT, that had opened this particular market.
Eric Zimmerman and Olivia Clark supported the removal, and Zimmerman had this on a to do list he made public predating the BP coverage.
It’s very bizarre that the diverter removal was couched as “public safety” with a highly speculative benefit: “moar, faster police cars.” The improvement in public safety from more cars is dubious at best, but the actual public safety of not being injured or killed that was demonstrated by the diverters was concrete.
This really shows that “public safety” was being cynically used as cover for an irresponsible, unpopular move.
I’m a cyclist and I support public safety.
That’s great. Do you think the removal of these diverters will improve public safety?
This comment makes me realize that I have never met someone who routinely rides a bike for transportation or recreation that does not support public safety.
“This really shows that “public safety” was being cynically used as cover for an irresponsible, unpopular move.”
“For public safety” or “for the children” are phrases that are beloved by corrupt politicians (but I’m repeating myself) that are pretty much red flags that the policy or law is going to trample on rights and/or take money from the many to create a slush fund for the benefit of the few.
If it was actually about “public safety” they should be able to identify the specific aspect of how it is being made safe. Like when the diverters were put in there was an actual reason other than “public safety”.
I thought this new form of government was supposed to stop shady back room deals.
Arguably, that’s exactly what has happened. The diverters have remained in place.
I think you are confusing investigative journalism for administrative/executive branch accountability (none as far as I can tell).
I think it was a couple councilors who tipped JM off this time
Sure…but the new form of government arguably facilitates backroom deals by executive leadership by removing any direct legislative oversight*. The legislative branch should have direct oversight over a city administrative leadership that, IMO, has always functioned to prioritize the regressive interests of portland’s plutocrats.
*not arguing that the previous form of government was ideal either.
Thanks for keeping on this, Jonathan.
You’re welcome! Thanks BikeLoud too though! I was sort of waiting to see if they’d try to make any progress on the plan before picking it back up again.
It’s so obvious to everyone that this story boils down to one thing:
[insert name of monied person who lives in NW] called Mayor Wilson and asked him to remove the diverters, OR someone on his staff relayed a message from same monied person, and THAT was what led to the order to remove the diverters. PEMO was probably never involved but they were used to justify the decision.
There was never any “process” or other systematic effort to determine whether diverters are or are not in the public interest.
People tell me that Mayor Wilson is now drunk with power and calls other supposedly powerful people all over the metro area to make this thing or that thing happen – whatever the last powerful person he talked to asked him to make happen. Wilson presents as a man of the people but he is actually an old-style Portland politician, which is to say an influence peddlar of the highest order. It kinda makes sense since he has almost no power in the new gov’t structure so he’s trying to maximize his informal power – whatever influence he can exert via back channels.
Anne Hill:
“I understand there’s a lot of misinformation. I understand that diverters became the name of what that was… it wasn’t diverters.”
If this is an actual quote, it’s the kind of sentence that combines condescension and poor verbal communication skills in a uniquely unflattering way. Can the City not hire better people for these jobs?
Hill’s comment reeks of “I know best and don’t want people below my level, particularly ordinary citizens, being involved in the process.”
I saw it often in my Public Health career, administrators with no subject matter expertise over-ruling professional staff in order to score brownie points with someone they view as more important than the people they are supposed to serve.
I find it interesting to compare PBOT’s actions in this case to the recent story about PBOT painting BUS BIKE signs.
In this case, An engineer reviewed data and determined that traffic diverters were warranted. The locations were reviewed and approved presumably to accommodate emergency vehicles and meet all the required clearances. When push came to shove, PBOT was able to note that the diverters were part of a transportation plan, and their installation was carefully considered. The built design was an engineered solution to support a clear goal with a clear design: make a greenway safer by reducing car through traffic.
The BUS BIKE signs represent PBOT’s worst impulses. They are not supporting a clear goal (are they identity? wayfinding? advisory?). They are not thoroughly thought out or executed. This works smacks of bikewashing- trying to buy some goodwill for a fad that is getting some good press.
My point is that PBOT has capable people within it, but they are also prone to self-hype and bike-washing. This story has revealed concerning levels of backroom dealing and possible corruption. The Mayor, PEMO, the City Administrator and hopefully this will lead to more accountability. The story also highlights the importance of PBOT doing work that is following adopted plans and is thoroughly developing ideas before implementing them. I hope PBOT sees this as wake up call as much as City leadership.
Gee who would have thought that having an unelected city administrator with a disproportionate level of power would cause problems? No way anyone could have seen that coming. /s
If city officials can circumvent process to remove barriers that keep cyclists safe, it only seems fair that the community can place barriers wherever they want without following process as well. If we start wasting PBOT’s time removing guerrilla infrastructure they won’t have any time to act on the stupid ideas of their own. Some orange vests, hardhats, jersey barriers and a rented forklift and we could make some change in this city.