2025 Archives

I have a nemesis in my neighborhood. It’s whoever keeps putting these signs up.

— A guest article by northeast Portland resident Missy LeDoux.

I live in the Kerns neighborhood of inner Northeast Portland, which is usually a lovely place to live, walk, and bike. One of the reasons I chose to live here is because it has access to three bus lines: the 12, 19, and 20. That makes life much easier for me as a car-free person who gets around primarily via biking and public transit.

And walking. A lot of walking. Rain or shine, I walk. One of my personal mantras is “anywhere is walking distance.”

But recently, someone in my neighborhood has been loudly declaring: “Cars reign here. You are secondary.”

That declaration has come in the form of an unknown person installing (non-PBOT approved) street signs along NE 24th Ave. They state in big bold letters: LOOK! MAKE EYE CONTACT BEFORE CROSSING, and they proudly display a depiction of a pedestrian making eye contact with a driver.

I first noticed one of these signs back in August of 2024. My husband and I were walking home from hanging out with friends and spotted the sign attached to a telephone pole at the NW corner of NE Sandy and 24th. We posted about it in the BikeLoud PDX slack channel to raise awareness, and were met with frustration that mirrored our own. A group member reported the clearly non-approved signage using PDX reporter, and it was removed within a few days (whether by the city or by a citizen, we don’t know).

The signage clearly comes from the perspective of a driver who wants pedestrians to take on more responsibility for their own safety.

Some of you reading this might understand immediately why we were frustrated by this signage. But in case you’re wondering “What’s wrong with that? Seems like good advice,” let me explain the issue.

Let’s ignore the legality of the signage for a second and focus on its content. The messaging is clearly giving a directive to pedestrians. In high-vis yellow, made to look like an official street sign, it makes up a new law: pedestrians must make eye contact with drivers before they cross the road. The implication is that if they don’t, their life and safety are at risk. I’d even go so far as to say this signage implies that if you don’t make eye contact with a driver before crossing, the driver cannot be held responsible for hitting you. And I don’t think this interpretation is a stretch; the signage clearly comes from the perspective of a driver who wants pedestrians to take on more responsibility for their own safety in their interactions with cars. This naturally implies that car drivers should have less responsibility.

Fast-forward to today. I was walking through the neighborhood and spotted one of the signs again. I’d mostly forgotten about the sign from last summer, but here it was again, screwed into a stop sign pole at NE 24th and Oregon.

And it wasn’t alone. I looked around and spotted more signs, on nearly every corner of the intersection. I also spotted bright flashes of yellow at nearby intersections along the street.

My nemesis was back, and more prolific than ever.

But let me address the more gracious interpretation. What if this person isn’t my nemesis? What if they actually just want me to be safe and not get hit by a car? Maybe they think they’re doing a public service by providing unsolicited advice about how not to get hit.

But I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it should not have to be the responsibility of vulnerable road users to not get hit. It should be the responsibility of car drivers to look out for vulnerable road users who are not protected by metal cages. Should pedestrians be careful? Of course. While walking and biking around Portland, I’ve had numerous near misses with cars that almost hit me. In every instance, my own awareness and ability to quickly stop or swerve saved my life.

But does this mean car drivers should drive however they want, clinging to made-up rules about responsibility? No.

Additionally, what these signs advertise is simply not the law. According to ODOT, every intersection is a crosswalk, whether marked with zebra stripes or not. That means that legally, it’s the job of car drivers to look out for people walking and rolling at every intersection.

Finally, let’s look at the root of this sign’s advice: making eye contact with car drivers.

Should pedestrians have to do this? The short answer is, no. This is not listed anywhere in Oregon traffic law. Personally, I try to do it anyways when possible, simply because I feel marginally safer crossing if I know a driver has seen me. But should I have to? No. My presence at the intersection should be all it takes to make a car driver follow the law and yield to me.

“Should” aside, the more pressing question is: can pedestrians always make eye contact with car drivers? The answer to this is also no. Reasons include but are not limited to:

Some cars have tinted windows (often tinted above the legal threshold, but this law is rarely enforced).
Sometimes drivers and pedestrians wear sunglasses.
Weather conditions can make it difficult to see someone’s eyes.
And let’s not forget, as my nemesis did, that blind people exist, and their safety matters. 8% of Americans are blind or visually impaired, which translates to 20 million Americans.

But even for pedestrians who could make eye contact, it would have to be a two-way exchange. In my experience standing on street corners trying to cross, most drivers are not looking for me, and certainly not trying to make eye contact. My nemesis’s “rule” gives an out to any driver who doesn’t want to stop for pedestrians. It says, “Don’t want to stop? Just don’t look at their faces!” And unfortunately, that’s already what many drivers do.

At the end of the day, these signs are simply yet another instance of drivers shifting the responsibility of safety off of themselves, and onto pedestrians and cyclists. I love my neighborhood, but just like anywhere else in Portland, it’s also a place where drivers regularly speed on residential streets, ignore stop signs, and treat Sandy like the Autobahn. In light of these safety issues, we need more accountability for drivers, not less.

For now, I’ve reported these signs to the city using PDX reporter, and I hold out hope that they’ll be taken down soon. But I can’t singlehandedly protect Kerns, and Portland broadly, from this kind of insidious rhetoric. I hope others join me in this fight. I hope pedestrians can feel more safe and empowered in our city. And I hope drivers learn how to drive more safely, or not drive at all.

Update: A city of Portland employee responded to my report, stating: “It is true that un-permitted signs are not allowed to be posted on utility poles according to City Code 17.64.040, however the City does not have resources to enforce this code and the power utility companies own and maintain most utility poles in the City of Portland. You can contact the PGE Team to request their removal.”

Looks like my nemesis wins this round, thanks to the city’s lack of resources. But you’d better believe I’ll be contacting PGE and continuing to fight the good fight.

— Missy LeDoux lives and writes in Northeast Portland. She loves biking in dresses, walking everywhere, and convincing friends to take the bus with her. Find her ice cream and travel-related writing on Substack @withcherriesontop.

UPDATE, 5:30 at 7:05 am: PBOT Communications Director Hannah Schafer reached out to BikePortland with the following:

“I want to thank Missy for raising her concerns and apologize for the initial, unsatisfactory response she received. As a result of her op-ed, one of our engineering associates visited the site this morning and also identified some signs on our stop sign posts in addition to being on utility poles. Due to safety concerns, especially regarding the impact these signs may have on vision-impaired individuals, and the fact that they conflict with Oregon statute ( ORS 801.220 Crosswalk, ORS 811.028 Failure to stop and remain stopped for pedestrian), we’ve put in a maintenance request to have these signs removed.

We’re working to identify where the initial request may have gone in (if Missy wants to share that with me, I’d really appreciate it) so we can provide a better service outcome in the future.”

Job: Marketing & Outreach Coordinator – Nomad Cycles (FILLED)

Buffered Bike Lane with a bike symbol and arrow pointing forward

.Sorry, this job has been filled.

Portland City Councilor gave up $75,000 of his own office budget for safer streets

With all the City of Portland budget action last week, there was one interesting tweak you might have missed. Among the 126 amendments proposed by the 12-member City Council, one of them earmarked $75,000 to traffic safety projects in District 4.

City Councilor Mitch Green had unspent funds in his office budget, and according to his Chief of Staff Maria Sipin, he chose to dedicate it to small street improvements in their district. “Instead of carrying it over for staffing and other expenditures,” Sipin shared with BikePortland, “We wanted to hold it to do some quick, high-impact pedestrian safety projects.”

Each council office is allocated about $1.3 million per year to cover expenses like security, a share of the recent City Hall remodel, staff salaries, and so on. The city’s fiscal year ends June 30th, and funding cannot be carried over to the next year. Sipin says each office was given several options with what they could do with unspent funds. They could: return it to the General Fund, where it could be used by any bureau; donate the money to District 1 to help get a district office constructed; or they could re-appropriate the funds to FY 2025-2056. Green’s office chose the last option.

Councilor Mitch Green speaking at the World Day of Remembrance rally in November 2024. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

“We heard from people in our people in our district that they sometimes need just a tiny piece of traffic calming, or they need a crosswalk restriped or a sign repaired — and they weren’t getting a quick response from PBOT [Portland Bureau of Transportation],” Sipin shared. “Earmarking it for some kind of safety projects is aligned with what we’re trying to do.”

Councilor Green is an everyday bicycle rider and has spoke often about safe streets as a candidate. During a speech at a traffic safety rally in November 2024, he spoke about almost being hit by a car driver on his way to the event. As more people drive larger cars to stay safe, “Those who do not drive are increasingly exposed to the collateral damage of this arms race,” Green said. He has also made the connection between safer streets and making walking and cycling a more attractive choice over driving.

Before putting forth the budget amendment Wednesday, Sipin explained they reached out to PBOT to run the idea by the agency. PBOT approved, so they went for it. The amendment passed with a unanimous 12-0 vote.

$75,000 isn’t a lot when it comes to major street projects, but it’s enough to make a significant dent in smaller, quick-build projects — and it’s especially needed given the crisis-level transportation budget. For context, PBOT says those large concrete planters used as modal filters (aka diverters) cost about $5,000 to build and install. A new crosswalk can cost about $3,000 and PBOT has said they can daylight an intersection for about $700-$800 in materials and labor. In 2023, PBOT striped a bike lane for two blocks and completed 24 other small “missing links” projects for just $300,000.

Sipin says since this is the first time they’ve tried this budgeting move, it will be considered a pilot. As far as where they’ll spend the money, they’ve got their eyes on a crosswalk project, but the exact location hasn’t been determined.

(Note: While Green is one of the architects of the Sidewalk Improvement and Paving Program (SIPP) that passed council earlier this month, these funds are separate from that program.)

Monday Roundup: Shared streets, a true HAWK signal, flex posts, and more

Happy Tuesday everyone. We’ve got a short week, so let’s get right into it.

Here are the most notable stories that came across my desk in the past week…

School bollards: When PBOT gets serious about school streets (notice I said “when,” not “if”) I really hope they order a bunch of these pencil bollards to keep drivers away. (Detritus of Empire)

Shared streets law: Washington has passed a new “shared streets law” and I’m jealous. It allows cities to establish speed limits as low as 10 mph and removes the requirement for pedestrians to cross at crosswalks and corners. It unleashes the possibility for “woonerfs” statewide. We need this in Oregon! (The Urbanist)

It’s the bike share: A key to London’s massive growth in cycling rates is their Lime bike share system, which has 30,000 bikes and offers “zippy” e-bikes that offer an easy and convenient way for folks to get around. (The Economist) 🔒

Is this why they call it a HAWK signal? 🤣: A zoologist has document a hawk in New Jersey that uses a pedestrian-activated crosswalk signal as a hunting aid. (The Atlantic)

Bye bye flex posts: The City of Denver says plastic posts that protect bike lanes are too ugly and hard to maintain, so they’re replacing a bunch of them with rubberized curbs. (Westword)

Best kind of bus driver: Seattle bus operator Nathan Vass (who was keynote speaker at Oregon Walks fundraiser event two weekends ago, by the way) is all about community and has written a book about what he’s experienced driving routes many other drivers try to avoid. (KUOW)

Fatality trends not good: “Since an all-time reported low of 623 bicyclist deaths in 2010, we’ve seen an 87% increase in bicyclist deaths with consecutive all-time records for the most deaths in the last two years of available data.” (League of American Bicyclists)

Thanks to everyone who sent in links this week. The Monday Roundup is a community effort, so please feel free to send us any great stories you come across.

Podcast: In The Shed Episode 39

Happy Friday everyone! Kick back and enjoy our latest banter. Lots of good stuff in this one:

Eva’s trip to Bend
PPS School Board elections
All about Ainsworth (Eva got menaced by a driver!) and what PBOT has in store for an upgrade
PBOT’s new bicycling encouragement campaign
How to counter people who say, “But not everyone can ride a bike.”
Reasons for optimism at City Hall
City budget stuff
State transportation package update and cap and trade.
Bike Summer rides in the Portland Mercury print edition
How’d she get there? A tough one from SE Woodstock and Cesar Chavez to Peninsula Park for the Kickoff Ride.
and more!

Listen in the players above or wherever you get your podcasts.

Opinion: It’s time to reflect on River View Cemetery access

This weekend is the annual closure of the roads in River View Cemetery. While the bicycling and driving public is usually allowed to use the paved thoroughfares between the Sellwood Bridge and the Collins View neighborhood, Memorial Day weekend is a time when mourners need extra space and quiet.

As we respect the closure this year, it’s a good time to reflect on what access to the cemetery means, because we should never take it for granted.

River View is a private nonprofit managed by an executive director who answers to a board of trustees. They don’t have to allow bicycle riders on their property; but for decades now they’ve gifted us access. And it’s a good thing they do, because the roads provide a vital link in the bicycle network. There is no other viable route for bicycle riders between Sellwood and SW Terwilliger Blvd. SW Boones Ferry Road (to the north) is a fast and busy arterial with zero shoulder space, and the River View Natural Area (to the south) offers only steep, dirt trails which are (unfortunately!) closed to cycling.

River View Cemetery (circled in yellow) showing in Google Maps with “Biking” layer turned on.

I’ve covered safety concerns from cemetery leaders since as far back as 2006. Even after threats to restrict bike access in 2009, 2012, and 2017; I’ve been impressed by their patience and dedication to maintain access. Last fall, the executive director and members of the River View Board of Trustees reached out to me again; but something was different this time: They didn’t share a specific concern, they talked about a growing unease with the burden of full legal liability if and when a bad crash or collision was to happen on their grounds.

River View also reached out to Lewis & Clark College, whose campus practically borders the cemetery and whose faculty and staff rely on the safe route to work. Lois Leveen is one of them. She’s also the university’s director of public relations and has met with cemetery leaders over the past few months.

“Recently, River View Cemetery has begun to curtail access through their property, in part due to concerns about liability,” Leveen testified at a recent Portland City Council meeting this week when a Vision Zero resolution was being heard. “These changes have already had a chilling impact on bicycle commuters.” “It’s disturbing to consider how many more deaths and serious injuries might have occurred during the first ten years of Portland’s commitment to Vision Zero, if this route were not available,” Leveen added.

Leveen and the cemetery are now spreading the message that it’s time for the City of Portland to step up and share load when it comes to legal responsibility for the roads. “The City of Portland needs to recognize that a private entity should not be expected to continue to carry the full responsibility of providing safe bicycling and walking routes to the public,” she said in her testimony.

The idea is for Lewis & Clark, the Portland Bureau of Transportation, and River View Cemetery to work more closely on a short-term approach that changes the legal framework of public access (such as an official public easement), while the City commits to finding a permanent solution. At the very least, this issue needs to be on the local political radar.

River View Cemetery is in Council District 4, could it be a candidate for one of the “alternative pathways” Councilor Olivia Clark envisioned being built with funds from the new Sidewalk Improvement and Paving Program (SIPP)? Or perhaps Portland Parks and Metro can collaborate on a paved bicycle path through River View Natural Area? It might also be worth exploring a protected bike path on the SW Boones Ferry corridor.

Whatever the ultimate solutions are, the City of Portland can no longer afford to sit back and rely on this generous gift from a private entity. If we lose access to River View and there’s no viable alternative, it would be a massive setback for our transportation system and would impact thousands of lives.

So while cemetery visitors mourn lost loved ones this weekend, the City of Portland and bicycle riders should take time to reflect on what would be lost without access to the cemetery.

Advocates in shock as Dems float ‘cap and pave’ plan while funding bill remains secret

With just five weeks remaining in the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers have yet to unveil the details of a transportation funding package.

This delay was brought into even sharper focus when the two co-chairs of the committee the bill is being crafted in released a memo Thursday with an update on their progress. Among the list of items leaders of the Joint Committee on Transportation Reinvestment (TRIP) updated their colleagues on was a major new policy: The bill will include a new spin on “cap and trade” that would dedicate emission credits to highway projects.

Yes, you read that right. A legislature with a Democrat super-majority (albeit very slim) is crafting a transportation bill that could include a major new source of revenue that expands driving capacity.

The move is likely part of TRIP Committee co-chairs Senator Chris Gorsek and Representative Susan McLain’s (both Democrats) attempt to appease Republicans (and perhaps even some Democrats who love freeway megaprojects) whose votes they want to help pass the bill.

Environmental and transportation advocates immediately pounced on the move.

“It’s like Christmas in May for polluters,” said Lindsey Scholten, executive director of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, in a statement published by Move Oregon Forward. “Unfortunately, Democrats in charge are clearly letting Republicans take them for a ride and offering polluters their wish list at the expense of Oregonians.”

The Gorsek and McLain would replace Oregon’s current Climate Protection Program with a “market-based emissions reduction program” and link it to other West Coast markets. In their memo yesterday, the lawmakers made it clear that credits generated from gas and diesel emissions would be dedicated to the state highway fund for “core operations and major projects.” While no numbers were shared, the memo also said “a portion of remaining credits” would be dedicated to a list of other things like: wildfire prevention efforts, local nonprofits working on climate impact programs — and if there’s anything left over — pedestrian safety, transit, and rail projects.

The “cap and pave” program is likely the work of Senator Bruce Starr, who’s one of just a few Republicans working with Democrats to craft the package. Starr is a dedicated advocate for car users and has spent years in the legislature pushing for higher speed limits and more freeway spending. In 2008 Starr opposed a $30 million investment in bike and pedestrian facilities as part of a $1.2 billion expansion of I-5, saying he’d rather spend the money on, “a new interchange in Washington County that allows me to move people safely.”

Democrats released their framework for the $1.9 billion Transportation Reinvestment Package (TRIP) back in April. That framework includes a host of fee and tax increases that would help the Oregon Department of Transportation shore up its budget, pay for freeway megaprojects with massive cost overruns, and invest a relatively paltry sum in programs that fund bicycling, walking, and transit needs statewide.

Advocacy groups are pushing the Democrats to balance the package with much higher investments in transit, rail and projects that improve road safety.

While House and Senate leaders work behind closed doors and have floated a major new policy initiative just weeks prior to the end of the session, their memo promises an actual bill will be “forthcoming,” and that, “A fully transparent and public process will help evaluate and refine the proposals.”

In the meantime, I’ll continue to refresh the House Bill 2025 page on the Oregon Legislative Information System website.

Council boosts PBOT budget with increase to Uber and Lyft fees

A sharp exchange about transit, a councilor’s rideshare regret, and a substantial bump for Vision Zero and the transportation budget were among the notable moments from a marathon, 12-hour Portland City Council meeting Wednesday.

The 12 councilors were tasked with approval of an $8.5 billion budget. Using Mayor Keith Wilson’s proposal as a starting point, councilors filed over 120 amendments prior to the meeting. Only about 30 amendments were discussed and/or voted on (I haven’t seen the final list), and there’s more budget action to come on June 11th; but Wednesday’s meeting gave transportation reformers plenty to sink their teeth into.

While a successful bid from Councilor Angelita Morillo to swap $2 million in proposed Portland Police Bureau funding for parks maintenance grabbed most of the headlines, council also passed an increase to rideshare (also called transportation network company, or TNC) user fees that will have a substantial impact to the Portland Bureau of Transportation budget. And Councilor Jamie Dunphy helped Councilor Tiffany Koyama Lane make good on her promise to boost spending on the Vision Zero program.

Let’s start with the new rideshare fee.

Zimmerman campaigning at Bike Happy Hour in July 2024. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

People currently pay a 65 cents per ride fee to use a rideshare company like Uber or Lyft in Portland. Eyeing those 8 million annual rides, Mayor Wilson proposed doubling that fee to $1.30, a move that would raise $5.1 million in additional revenue for PBOT. Councilor Steve Novick (with councilors Morillo, Green and Dunphy as sponsors) put forward a motion to raise the fee to $2.00 per ride for an estimated total of $5 million in additional transportation revenue.

Novick said the change was necessary because, “We know the transportation bureau is starved for money…and I think we should use every dollar we can to address our failing streets.” Then Novick shared regret over his role in allowing rideshare companies to operate in Portland at all — when he cast one of the deciding votes during his former council tenure 10 years ago. “I actually now believe that that was a mistake,” Novick shared. “At the time, some environmentalists thought that [Uber and Lyft] would reduce the use of cars… Instead, it just resulted in more cars in the streets and more carbon emissions. And I think as long as they’re out there, then we should use it to raise money for transportation.”

The most vocal opponent of the increased fee was Councilor Eric Zimmerman. He said he’s uncomfortable passing on the higher costs per ride to end-users. Then Zimmerman tried to make the case that Portland needs to maintain cheap access too Uber and Lyft because the state of TriMet is so bad it’s not an option for many people. He said he’s heard of Portland State University students who unenrolled for classes because they planned to take transit to class, only to become uncomfortable due to safety concerns while riding it:

“A number of students were taking Uber and Lyft in, and they didn’t prefer it, but because of the situation on TriMet — which is, as some people in this dais have said, our largest homeless shelter — where dangerous behavior happens every single day, where TriMet has had to hire over 200 safety specialists in order to make the trains and the busses barely palatable… I don’t want to raise taxes on individual Portlanders, particularly when the other alternatives are pretty crappy right now.”

“I don’t know why it’s always the men that are, like, six-feet tall, they’re terrified of being on the bus. It’s really not a big deal.”

Those remarks sparked an immediate response by Councilor Angelita Morillo:

“As the only person here who’s dependent on transit — because I don’t have a car, I don’t have a license, and my mom only knew how to drive a motorcycle, so we never learned how to drive — I don’t know why it’s always the men that are, like, six-feet tall, they’re terrified of being on the bus. It’s really not a big deal. I ride the bus all the time. I’m five-foot-two and 130 pounds, so I think we will all survive it. People love the bus. I see people fall in love on the bus, and the reality is that we need this funding for our budget.”

When it came time to vote, the fee increase passed 8-4, with councilors Olivia Clark, Dan Ryan, and Loretta Smith joining Zimmerman in opposition.

With the rideshare fee increase in the bank, Councilor Jamie Dunphy put his amendment on the table that would use that new revenue to fully fund recent cuts to PBOT’s Vision Zero work. The past two city budgets have axed contributions from the city’s Recreational Cannabis Tax Fund to PBOT to the tune of $677,664 ($400,000 last year and $277,664 this year). The bulk of that money was used to fund Vision Zero-related projects and programs. Dunphy proposed an amendment to use a portion of the new rideshare fee revenue to restore those cuts.

Speaking in favor of the move, Councilor Koyama Lane said, “We need to show Portlanders that we’re serious about this. These are our streets. We have a responsibility to make them safe for everyone. We need to make Vision Zero whole.”

Because Dunphy’s amendment initially sought to decrease General Fund dollars going into PBOT (knowing that new rideshare fees would be available instead), some councilors expressed concern that only Vision Zero would be funded, while “livability” needs like dismantling derelict RVs and other programs wouldn’t get as much funding. So Dunphy split out that part of the amendment and it will be discussed it at their June 11th meeting.

The amendment ultimately passed 8-4, with councilors Ryan, Novick, Zimmerman, and Smith all voting “no”.

Another notable amendment, Councilor Loretta Smith’s attempt at a bond issuance and financing plan for the Sidewalk Improvement and Paving Program (SIPP), failed by a vote of 4-8. Surprisingly, a chief architect of the program, Councilor Mitch Green, voted against it. He said he felt the plan was “premature” and wants to wait for more financial analysis around the cost of the debt.

Council didn’t discuss any of the Mayors proposed parking fee increases.

From here, councilors can still make tweaks to amendments and there will be another bite at the budget apple on June 11th — one week before it must be adopted on June 18th.

Weekend Event Guide: Freeways, farmers market, Tina Turner, and more

A scene from the 2010 ‘Dead Freeways Ride.’ (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

The weather should warm up a bit just in time for the weekend, and it looks like we’ll have lots of sun on Saturday. I hope you’re able to get out on your bike. Check out my list of this weekend’s best rides below…

Saturday, May 24th

La Doyenne – 9:00 am at 9898 SE Knapp St (SE)
If you missed the hill-climbing fest of De Ronde, consider its southeast Portland cousin, the “La Doyenne,” organized by the same folks. This is an unsanctioned group ride that will test your climbing ability and your sanity. More info here.

Sorella Forte Cycling Club Group Ride – 9:00 am at River City Bicycles Parking Lot (SE)
Join this great group of women, trans, and non-binary cyclists who share a passion for riding their bikes. Expect a 30-mile or so route with a relatively fast pace of 14-19 mph. More info here.

New Trails Day at Rocky Point – 9:00 am at Rocky Point Trails (Scappoose)
Join advocates with NW Trail Alliance to celebrate new trails at this great riding area. Novice and advanced groups. Event ends with tailgate party. More info here.

PSU Farmers Market Ride – 10:00 am along Clinton Greenway (SE)
Go buy food on your bike and connect with a wonderful community of folks. What could be better than enjoying our beautiful city at a local, outdoor market on a Saturday?! More info here.

Saturdays in May Downtown Edition – 10:00 am at Japanese American Historical Plaza (NW)
Get plugged into bike activism with folks from BikeLoud PDX who will lead this ride while sharing insights on different types of bike facilities and what it takes to make our city a better place to ride. Route ends at the Return of the Dragon street festival in Old Town. More info here.

Tina Turner Memorial Ride – 7:30 pm at Colonel Summers Park (SE)
Come out and pedal and dance to the tunes of legendary singer Tina Turner, who died three years ago. Ride celebrates the life and music of this iconic, inspiring woman. More info here.

Sunday, May 25th

Portland Freeway History Ride – 1:00 pm at Salmon Street Springs (SW)
Portland’s central city has a fascinating freeway history, and this ride will allow you to lean into your archaeological activism to reveal the story of the paved monstrosities that dominate our city today and the ones that were never built and/or removed. More info here.

— Did I miss your event? Please let me know by filling out our contact form, or just email me at maus.jonathan@gmail.com.

I went through the 100 proposed budget amendments so you don’t have to

After months of debates and deliberations, the time has come for our 12 city leaders to vote on a balanced budget. Today, using the Mayor’s proposed budget as a starting point, councilors will take a vote to approve the city budget.

What are the stakes for transportation-related funding? Before I get into the amendments being discussed at Council today, it’s worth knowing a few basics about the starting point:

As I reported earlier this month, the Mayor’s proposed budget helps the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) avoid the worst of the cuts and layoffs they had prepped for. He does this by raising fees on parking, rideshare app users, and leaf pickup fees. Mayor Wilson is also counting on $11 million from Salem when/if state lawmakers to pass a gas tax increase this session.

Back to today’s action…

I’ve been tracking the conversations and have reviewed the 100 or so amendments councilors have proposed. I did a short overview video on Instagram yesterday afternoon, but since that went up the full list of amendments has been made public.

As we get ready for what is likely to be a 12 hour council meeting today, I thought I’d share a list of the transportation amendments below. I found about 15 amendments from 7 different councilors. Check them out below in alphabetical order (note that a “Budget Note” is more of a policy intention statement that doesn’t have a financial component):

Councilor Olivia Clark (D4)

Develop a “Community Partnership Framework”: Clark wants to invest $160,000 into the Public Works Service Area (one FTE) to create a new program that would empower citizen volunteers to take on programs and services. This could mean a group like SW Trails or Bike Loud PDX could take on a more substantial role in doing things like trail maintenance or bike lane sweeping. This could also become the program that, for instance, helps a group of bike bus leaders secure “Road Closed” signs to create a safer route to school.

Add a budget note to improve SW Trails and address the Red Electric Trail: Clark wants to raise the profile of the 4T Trail (maintained by SW Trails, a nonprofit group) from the OHSU Waterfront campus to Pill Hill. This note directs the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) to identify funding required to improve the trail and bring a report outlining their findings to the Transportation and Infrastructure (T & I) Committee by January 1, 2026. Clark also wants PBOT to bring a plan to design and complete a segment of the Red Electric Trail (from Terwilliger Blvd, through a newly acquired part of George Himes Park under Barbur Blvd, then north on low traffic streets to Gibbs St and across the Hooley Bridge, to arrive at the south waterfront) to the T & I Committee by the same date.

Councilor Mitch Green (D4)

Transfer Council Office Funds to FY 2025–26 for District 4 Pedestrian Safety Projects: Green wants $75,000 in one-time General Fund dollars to spend on “selected pedestrian safety projects” in his district.

Councilor Sameer Kanal (D2)

Increase the TNC fees from $2 per ride to $2.21 per ride and swap $1,620,000 in TNC Fees for PBOT General Fund: Kanal is one of several councilors eyeing an increase in fees for rideshare users as a way to backfill the PBOT budget. TNC ride fees are currently 0.65 cents and the Mayor’s proposed budget wants to double that to $1.30. Councilor Angelita Morillo has an amendment to increase that to $2.00 (see below). Kanal would use the additional $1.62 million raised from his increase to bolster PBOT’s General Transportation Revenue (a discretionary source of funding from state gas tax and other fees that is used for basic maintenance and operations).

Add a Budget Note to Study a Package Delivery Fee: Kanal wants the city’s Revenue Division and City Attorney to explore the feasibility of a new fee on last-mile deliveries to fund transportation. Kanal’s fee would exempt prepared food deliveries.

Councilor Tiffany Koyama Lane (D3)

Amend the Budget to Restore Funding for Vision Zero: The Mayor’s budget proposed a $277,000 cut to Vision Zero (VZ) work. Koyama Lane’s amendment seeks to boost VZ spending by $500,000. To pay for that she recommends cutting other PBOT programs or using bureau contingency funds.

Amend the Budget to Support Vision Zero Programming: A separate Koyama Lane amendment seeks to move PBOT’s top Vision Zero staffer to the Deputy City Administrator of Public Works’ office. The move is intended to more fully integrate VZ across multiple bureaus and give the issue more power. This would also include an increase of $216,000 from the General Fund to the DCA Public Works office to kickstart VZ efforts.

Vision Zero budget notes: Lane wants to re-affirm VZ by requiring PBOT to more clearly identify funding needs, increase the frequency of reporting, update the VZ Action Plan, and make sure all VZ actions are rooted in PBOt’s Equity Matrix toolkit. A separate budget note calls on PBOT to create a funding and staffing plan to reconvene the VZ Task Force and report back to Council by September 1, 2025.

Councilor Angelita Morillo (D3)

Increase Transportation Network Company (TNC) Fees from the Mayor’s proposal of $1.30 to $2.00: Morillo’s proposal would raise an addition $5 million for PBOT beyond the Mayor’s proposal.

Amend the Budget to Support Critical Traffic Safety Measures in District 3: Morillo wants $800,000 in one-time funding reallocated from the Portland Police Bureau to PBOT in order to complete a safety project on Calle Cesar Chavez from SE Powell to SE Schiller. Morillo’s intention is to improve safety on the stretch of Cesar Chavez where Tuyet Nguyen was hit and killed while walking back in January and where Jeanie Diaz was killed in 2023.

Transfer New Police Funding to Support Traffic Safety Infrastructure: Morillo wants to use $2 million the Mayor had set-aside for the Police Bureau to support PBOT “traffic safety infrastructure.”

Amend the Budget to Transfer New Police Funding to Explore evidence-based, place-based environmental interventions that can be implemented to reduce crime and gun violence in high-risk or hotspot neighborhoods: Morillo is seeking $500,000 from the General Fund to support the Safe Blocks program. Her intention appears to be similar to how former City Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty (Morillo’s former boss) used PBOT and Portland Parks interventions to decrease crime and gun violence in Mt. Scott Park in 2022.

Councilor Loretta Smith (D1)

Amend the Budget for Funding for the Sidewalk Improvement and Pavement Program (SIPP): Smith seeks to pass an ordinance that would allocate $200 million for the Sidewalk Improvement and Pavement Program (SIPP) passed earlier this month. The funding would be raised by selling $50 million worth of limited revenue bonds for the next four years. Smith wants the $8 million debt service on these bonds to be paid for by funds the Portland Housing Bureau pays to Multnomah County as part of Joint Office of Homeless Services.

Councilor Eric Zimmerman (D4)

Amend the Budget to Provide $50,000 of one-time General Fund to community trails group for signage repair, replacement, and updates in the SW and NW trail system: Zimmerman wants to help fund repairs and updates in the “SW and NW trail system.” I’m not yet clear on what specific trails he’s talking about, so we’ll have to wait and see how this one shakes out.

That’s it for amendments. Council will deliberate all of these today in what could be a meeting that runs close to midnight. If you want to follow along, check the meeting page with all the documents, and/or watch the livestream on YouTube. The Council will morph into the Budget Committee at 11:45 am.

Keep in mind, today’s vote is to approve the budget. The final budget will be officially adopted on June 18th. Between now and then, they can make only relatively minor adjustments.

I’ll have the budget meeting playing at Bike Happy Hour tonight, so come by Rainbow Road from 3:00 to 6:00 pm if you want to talk about it. If you have any questions about the budget, just ask and I’ll be happy to share what I know (or find out if I don’t). And stay tuned on Thursday for a recap of any transportation-related fireworks.

Portlanders tell TriMet: We want continuous bus priority lanes on 82nd Avenue!

Remember back in April when I shared a TriMet survey about transit on 82nd Avenue? The agency has revealed results of that survey, and if you love bus priority lanes, you’re going to want to keep reading…

The specific issue TriMet was curious about had to do with business access to transit — or “BAT” — lanes. TriMet’s survey queried public opinion on three project options: to have some BAT lanes, which would be three miles of transit priority lanes between Clackamas Town Center and NE Killingsworth; more BAT lanes, essentially a continues bus-priority lane the entire seven-mile length of the project; or to widen three intersections to make room for more transit lanes while not reducing lane capacity for car users (LOL).

It’s worth noting that the “some BAT lanes” option would be the cheapest of the three with an estimated price tag of $8.4 million (out of a total project cost estimate of $351 million). Doing BAT lanes the full length of the project would cost twice that amount, and the cost to widen three intersections would be four times that amount.

After tallying 1,414 surveys responses, despite its extra cost, the “more BAT lanes” option came out on top. 70% of respondents said more BAT lanes would be worth it, compared to 58% who said the same of some BAT lanes. On the flip side, only 21% of respondents wanted TriMet to invest in intersection widening. The results were first shared at a meeting of TriMet’s Community Advisory Committee last week.

Looking closer at the results, even survey takers who identified as drivers want more transit-priority lanes. 67% of drivers chose more BAT lanes — and even a majority (54%) of folks who own and/or manage a business on 82nd Avenue said more transit lanes should be the priority. Overall, this was a clear illustration that many Portlanders want better transit, even if it reduces driving capacity, increases traffic diversion onto other streets nearby, and costs more.

Oregon Walks Executive Director and 82nd Avenue Community Advisory Committee member Zachary Lauritzen is a major proponent of building transit lanes the entire length of the project. “If we can put full transit lanes all up and down 82nd Avenue,” he shared as part of his testimony to the Portland City Council Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Monday. “It slows down vehicles. It enhances people on the bus. It makes the pedestrian and cycling experience better. This is a concrete example where you all need to give political cover to our PBOT leadership and say, ‘We’re going to do this because we care about this. We’re prioritizing this.'”

TriMet hasn’t made a decision about the final design and project scope yet. Like many major infrastructure projects, the Trump Administration has cast a cloud of uncertainty by threatening to suspend funds for anything that’s not a freeway megaproject. Of the project’s current $351 million cost, about $200 million is assumed to come from federal sources.

Video: Advocates delivered clear demand for action at City Council on Monday

Yesterday I shared a (hastily written!) recap and video of the big celebration of cycling and Vision Zero at Portland City Hall. But what happened afterward at a meeting of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee was just as important. Advocates lined up and delivered one piece of powerful testimony after another — all as high-profile leaders of the transportation bureau and Public Works Service Area looked on.

I rewatched all the testimony and have pulled out just some of the highlights into the short video above. It features mic-drop worthy remarks from: bicycle advocate extraordinaire Joseph Perez, David Binnig with BikeLoud PDX, Abernethy Elementary School Bike Bus leader Lauren McCune, and Oregon Walks Executive Director Zachary Lauritzen.

Watch their remarks in the video above and read the text below:

Joseph Perez:

Portland City Council has not invested in safer roads, so PBOT has installed signs. I think signs and paint are like thoughts and prayers.

Previous mayor and council required PBOT to cut its budget. Is it any wonder Vision Zero appears to be stalled? It seems antithetical to a Vision Zero commitment if this city council were to tolerate or perpetuate any cuts to PBOT.

David Binnig

A lot of us have served on work groups and task forces and advisory committees — and then seen those recommendations not followed or not funded.

Lauren McCune

We always point to a lack of funding, but no amount of money is sufficient. Our car-centric transportation system has an insatiable demand for more more pavement, more speed, more fuel, more money, more lives.

When our Abernethy bike bus launched in 2022 it had a couple dozen riders. Fast forward to May of 2024 and we had hundreds. There is an incredible latent demand for bike riding, yet the consistent and widespread demand for better bike and transit infrastructure is deprioritized.

Our Vision Zero commitment must be paired with a commitment to reduce vehicle miles traveled. If not, we have to ride faster just to stand still.

So we ask that Portland’s renewed commitment to Vision Zero renews our vision to build a city where driving reflects its true cost to society, so our residents instead walk, bike, roll and take transit. We can’t do this with the status quo, and we can’t do this without each other. We’re ready to ride together.

Zachary Lauritzen:

This resolution won’t change anything. It’ll be actions that change something.

We built a transportation system that is intentionally made so vehicles can go far and fast, and so now we’re asking for the hard work of saying we’re going to change that, and that starts today.

There was a proposed budget to reduce Vision Zero by $277,000 and if we’re serious about this, we don’t cut Vision Zero. We just don’t.

We know why this is happening. We know the interventions that are needed. You have a staff at Pbot, the Vision Zero team that have a well of knowledge. They need the money and they need the political cover to do it.

These actions will make some people mad. Slowing down vehicles will make some people mad. Enforcement will make some people mad. But you’ve got to do it.

And so today is the beginning of a journey. And I hope you have the political courage to pass this, and then be ambassadors to your colleagues and really invest and make a change. This was the hand you were dealt. The question is, how do you play that hand?