Please nominate comments by replying with “comment of the week” or “COTW” so I can more easily find them via search. Thank you.
This week’s COTW is about the benefits of bicycling that aren’t always front-and-center in debates about policy, projects, and politics — and why those benefits don’t change depending on geography and shouldn’t succumb to the whims of what “makes sense” for an elected official. Reader Lois Leveen’s initial comment touched off a lively set of responses and she followed-up with an explanation of why she believes bicycling is important and worthy of support citywide.
Perhaps my initial comment misled people into thinking that climate crisis is the only measure of public health or public good. It is not. I bike commute 18 miles roundtrip to my job. My workplace is not very easy to get to on public transit and bicycling requires a particular commitment because of our location, even for folks who live closer to our workplace. Yet my colleagues who commute by bike generally describe their commute as one of the best parts of the day. I haven’t heard that from any of those who drive to campus, even though they are the vast majority of my coworkers. Oh, and although it’s anecdotal, I’ve noticed my driving coworkers get sick a lot more than I do. So yes, we need people to understand the emotional, cognitive, psychological, and physical benefits of bicycling and walking. And the social benefits of all of those and of taking public transit. I often interact with friends/acquaintances I happen upon during my commute. I also get to interact pleasantly with strangers just by saying hello as I pass them. Transit riders can have the same social interactions (please spare me the comments about how dangerous public transit is; statistically, drivers of motor vehicles are injuring and killing and threatening way more than people on transit).
And also just a reminder, even with abundant clean energy (which we do not and likely never will have), electric cars, trucks, and SUVs would still pollute, as tires on the road cause devastating pollution and so does the manufacture of electric vehicles. And electric vehicles still injure and kill when driven recklessly; in fact, drivers’ ability to accelerate faster in electric vehicles — even when not driven aggressively — makes them deadlier in collisions. So, um, yeah sorry to disappoint everyone who went sideways in response to my initial comment but public good/public health takes many forms and government should advance rather than undermine it.
They don’t call it the “comedy of the commons”, nor the “romance of the commons”.
I chose this comment because I appreciate when someone stays engaged with a thread and doesn’t just comment-and-run. I also like how Leveen took time to expand on her point and shared her views without going negative on other road users (or readers). As for the contents of her comment, I think given that societal breakdown is the cause of many of our problems, the positive impact of non-driving modes on community (re)building is something that deserves more attention.
There have been some very lively, high-volume comment threads lately. (I’m not sure why.) But with just one moderator (hi!) these days, I am very grateful at how productive and thoughtful almost all of them are. Thanks everyone for helping make BP comments a useful platform and helpful resource.
Remember to reply with “comment of the week” or “COTW” if you want to nominate a comment this coming week.
After a solid break, I’m eager to get back into the swing of things around here. There’s a lot of work to do, so let’s get started by catching up on some of the most notable stories.
A new era: I think I speak for many city lovers when I say there’s nervous excitement as New York City’s congestion pricing program has finally gotten underway with a $9 per car fee. There are hopes that once the dust settles, charging drivers more to drive in central cities and using the money to fund driving alternatives could spread beyond Manhattan. (NPR)
Zero emissions: I loved reading about these new “zero emissions zones” in cities in The Netherlands because it made me proud that PBOT already has a similar program in place. (Zag Daily)
Cars are the new cigarettes: The deadly rampage of a large truck driver in New Orleans is just the latest thing to ramp up the campaign against “car bloat” and its risks to us all. An expert on the topic thinks the advocacy approach should mimic how we used secondhand smoke to change smoking culture. (Vox)
Two chains: Very cool to see innovation in utility bikes made for use in Africa. Instead of a derailleur, SRAM developed a two-chain, two-speed drivetrain system. Can anyone tell how a rider switches between the two chains? (Cycling Weekly)
Crime trucks: America’s crime truck problem also includes this guy in Dallas, OR who drove into a convenience store and proceeded to steal beer and cigarettes before trying to escape and then eventually came to his senses. (KOIN)
AI doesn’t see you: “It’s classic Silicon Valley hubris to assume Waymo’s ability to predict my behavior supersedes a law designed to protect me,” says a reporter who was not yielded to by a robotaxi. (Washington Post)
Happy times: A new study shows that once someone drives enough to be considered “extremely car-dependent” they also become less happy. (The Guardian)
Olympic effort: The buzz in Los Angeles is how best to manage traffic as the world descends on the car culture capital of America for the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympic Games. How about a massive shift toward transit and other non-driving modes like bikes and scooters? This article is a good summary of where those conversations stand. (BBC)
Yes I took some liberties with that headline, but I promise it’s accurate.
Mayor Keith Wilson (seated at bottom left) at council yesterday.
Thursday was the first ever meeting of Portland’s new, 12-member City Council. While all the eyes and headlines were on the general meeting where councilors elected their president and vice president after nine rounds of voting, I found an interesting exchange that happened in a subsequent work session to be just as notable.
First things first.
The first day on the job for the new council and Mayor Keith Wilson was fascinating. Seeing the 12 elected officials seated in an arc inside the remodeled City Hall, right under the seal of the city, made the changes to our form of government very tangible. And when Mayor Wilson finally joined the meeting as a guest — sitting in the same seats used for public and invited testimony instead of as an equal to council members — was a striking contrast to the old way of doing business.
“When you say, ‘It doesn’t make sense that we’re putting a million dollars into this bike lane,’ and it doesn’t make sense to you and your neighbors — you now have voice to bring that idea forward.”
– Keith Wilson, mayor
Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Having the mayor seated below council is a symbol of this new council’s independence. During the vote for council president, there was a debate about whether or not the mayor should be able to cast a tiebreaker vote. Council ultimately sided with City Attorney Robert Taylor (and against Councilor Loretta Smith) in keeping the mayor out of it. This set a precedent going forward that the mayor’s tiebreaker is only intended for legislative issues like passing ordinances and adopting policy documents, and that council administration will remain solely in council’s hands.
And that could be an interesting precedent. Because with 12 members of council, we could be in for a lot of tie votes. Yesterday’s 6-6 deadlock was first between Councilor Candace Avalos (D1) and Councilor Olivia Clark (D4). This gave us our first view of what could be future blocs of progressive (for Avalos) and more centrist/moderate council members (for Clark). Then after several 6-6 votes, Councilor Elana Pirtle-Guiney (D2) was thrown into them mix and she eventually earned all the Clark votes. New candidate, same tie. The deadlock was only broken when Councilor Mitch Green (D4) switched his vote from Avalos to Pirtle-Guiney. It was a big surprise, given Green’s progressive credentials (he’s backed by the Democratic Socialists of America) and the fact that he’s the one who initially nominated Avalos for the post. (For a blow-by-blow recap of the vote and meeting, with quotes from Green and other councilors, browse my thread on Bluesky.)
From what I’ve gathered, Pirtle-Guiney is well-liked by folks on all ends of the political spectrum and is seen as a compromise between Avalos and Clark (Clark herself referred to Pirtle-Guiney as a “potential compromise” in my interview with her before the holiday break). Pirtle-Guiney is a political insider with deep roots in the labor movement and was a top aide to former Oregon Governor Kate Brown. Pirtle-Guiney will have former schoolteacher Councilor Tiffany Koyama Lane (D3) by her side as council vice president (Koyama Lane won as the sole nominee with a unanimous vote). These are new roles in Portland city government, so their impact and influence are still unknown.
While there was plenty to glean about councilors’ comments and actions at that marathon first meeting, I want to share a notable exchange from a work session with Mayor Keith Wilson held just after it.
Councilor Eric Zimmerman
Mayor Keith Wilson
The work session was ostensibly a chance for Wilson to update council on his work to set up winter shelters for people who live on the streets. But it was also a chance for the 12 councilors to address him publicly as members of city council for the first time. District 4 (westside and Sellwood) Councilor Eric Zimmerman used the opportunity to plant a flag in the mayor’s mind about local control. Or put another way, protecting his turf (district) from city agencies. Zimmerman made it clear he wants a district perspective on all decisions and I’m sharing this here today because he specifically mentioned implementation of “pedestrian type plazas” and “certain lanes or traffic changes.”
And what made this exchange even more interesting to me is how Mayor Wilson responded.
Zimmerman said he wants district leaders to have sway over how city projects and plans are implemented “on the ground.” “I am not so interested in park development happening in exactly the same in every single neighborhood, or how public plazas happen across the city. I think each geographic area has a say in what works, what their needs are, what they’re interested in,” he said. “And that won’t happen unless we force the issue from a leadership standpoint, that the bureaus understand that there is a district perspective, and there are great things that have worked in in my district that have not worked in others, and vice versa.”
Then to flesh out his point, Zimmerman mentioned specifically, “some public plazas or pedestrian type plazas in downtown,” and “certain lanes or traffic changes.” He made it clear he sees his role as councilor to “being able to move and change those slightly.” “We want to hear from the [city] bureau, but we also want to make sure it makes sense specifically for that area.”
“My constituents and I personally feel that too much has been one-size-fits-all in the City of Portland for a generation… and my support will be much easier to get for everything we do if I know that there’s a lens for the district perspective on everything we do.”
Note that Zimmerman also talked about how he’s committed to partnering on this approach with council members from District 1 (east).
I’ll try to learn more about what projects and/or policies inspired these comments from Zimmerman. But it sounded relatively clear to me he’s thinking specifically about the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) and his remarks came from a sense of concern that some types of road designs and lane configurations that are used in the central city and inner neighborhoods, might not make sense in further-out places. Was he thinking about road diets in east Portland and bus priority lanes in southwest? Will Zimmerman carry the voices we’ve heard from some Portlanders who oppose projects that make major changes to how lanes and public right-of-way are used?
What further raised my eyebrows was Mayor Wilson’s response. Even though Zimmerman said nothing about bicycles, that’s what Wilson heard.
“To your last point about having perhaps a bike boulevard in a community,” Wilson replied. “When you say, ‘It doesn’t make sense that we’re putting a million dollars into this bike lane,’ and it doesn’t make sense to you and your neighbors — you now have voice to bring that idea forward. And what I commit to every one of you is: if it makes sense, if we think slow, look at the data, talk to the neighbors, find out different best practices, we stop, we pivot, and we act fast upon a change. That’s one thing I’m really looking forward to.”
It’s fascinating to me how Wilson heard concerns about plazas and “certain lanes or traffic changes” and his mind immediately went to being opposed to a bike boulevard.
If that’s what Zimmerman was thinking about, how will he represent voices from his district to lobby for changes to PBOT projects? Will council members from different districts align together to push for big changes in transportation? If so, will they push us forward or backward?
With just one meeting under our belts, it’s hard to know. But consider me intrigued.
The Bike Summer kickoff ride in June was a big highlight of 2024 for bike fun lovers of all stripes. (Photos: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Hello BikePortlanders, welcome to 2025. It’s great to have you here and I’m excited about getting started on our 20th year in business, but first let’s take a look back at 2024.
Before I get into some of the big stories, trends, and my thoughts for the future; here’s a bit about the output from BikePortland over the past 12 months.
It was another very productive year. We posted 621 stories here on the blog, published 21,460 of your comments, uploaded 62 videos to our YouTube channel and shared 52 podcast episodes. We also posted a ton of videos, photos, and updates on our social media channels.
Bike Happy Hour in February 2024.Bike Happy Hour in November 2024.
Bike Happy Hour was another big part of our 2024. We kept the tradition going strong by establishing our event as one of the best and busiest weekly social gatherings in the city. We welcomed almost every city council member and Mayor Keith Wilson to the event and brought city politics directly to the urbanist and livable streets community.
The Shed (the BikePortland HQ) continued to be a place where important conversations take place. I welcomed folks into this space for interviews, brainstorm sessions, met folks virtually during my Friday Office Hours, and of course hung out with Eva Frazier every Friday for our In the Shed podcast. Thanks to support from financial contributors and monthly subscribers, I was able to invest in equipment that allows me to easily share many of these conversations via video on our YouTube channel.
On the news and editorial front, here’s what I’ll remember from 2024.
We lost too many really great people. The deaths of veteran activist Jim Howell, bicycling basketball legend Bill Walton, and community organizer Sukho Viboolsittiseri will echo far beyond last year.
And on our streets, we had yet another unacceptably high number of fatal traffic crashes. The Portland Police Bureau says 65 people died while using our roads. I’m still working to verify the exact numbers and victim details, but we know that five of those crashes involved someone riding a bike (one suffered an apparent medical event prior to the crash): David Bentley, 49; Johnathan Henderson, 40; Gad Alon, 74; Sergio D. Hunt, 38; and Damon M. Cousins, 32. I’ve made my thoughts on traffic deaths clear in a recent opinion piece so I won’t go much more into this now. Bottom line: something needs to change and I’ll be here to help build pressure so that it does.
An issue that’s related to deaths on our roads is the disturbing trend that strengthened last year of car drivers using off-street paths and even grassy space in public parks. This abuse of the driving privilege shows how eroded social norms around driving have become and illustrate the vast dysfunction that exists within our driving culture.
On a happier note, the bike bus phenomenon continued to spread far and wide. Even city agencies launched bike buses to help gets staff to work healthier and happier! Local bike bus advocate Sam Balto launched a nonprofit to further push the idea into the mainstream and ended his year dropping his new business card with friends made at the White House in Washington D.C.
While Balto shows us the impact a single activist can have, the continued maturation and growth of BikeLoud PDX demonstrates that there’s no substitute for good, old-fashioned community organizing. The nonprofit BikeLoud reached new heights in 2024 by remaining a steady and positive presence in the community and winning its first major grant that will allow the group to hire its first paid staffer in 2025.
BikeLoud has also emerged as an important platform in and of itself. Their Slack communications channel is the go-to spot for activists who want to learn and get things done. On that note, 2024 was the year some Portlanders officially stopped waiting for the Portland Bureau of Transportation to clean up the damn bike lanes. To a level I’ve never seen before, folks are organizing their own bike lane maintenance. They are modifying equipment, sharing DIY videos, and getting their hands dirty cleaning up leaves, gravel, snow, and whatever else comes our way.
Underlying that DIY trend is a rising dissatisfaction and frustration with PBOT — not just among the safe streets and bike advocacy crowd, but across wide swaths of Portland. PBOT, an agency beleaguered by years of budget cuts, also had a very rough year, PR-wise. They were called out by some candidates during election campaigns for making driving too inconvenient, one guy got so mad at their enforcement cameras he shot at them with a gun, and we even saw the emergence of “anti-PBOT extremists” in Rose City Park. BikeLoud’s lawsuits against PBOT moved forward in 2024, including lengthy depositions last month with top planning staff regarding implementation of the State of Oregon’s “bicycle bill.” Even a visiting bike blogger made a point to criticize PBOT’s progress on building a safe bike network.
And to top things off, PBOT posted an inappropriate and tone-deaf video to social media last month the morning after a 75-year old person was hit and killed by a driver while walking in a crosswalk. PBOT must realize that the gargantuan task of changing traffic culture on a limited budget will be impossible without strong internal morale and the community on their side.
One thing our community usually loves are big projects, and 2024 had its share. TriMet opened a new bike path to the Portland Airport and cut the ribbon on a new path and bridge for bikes into Gateway Green. PBOT made big progress on a coming reconfiguration of NE Broadway and the exciting N Willamette Blvd project came into focus. And while many folks are pleased to see 82nd Avenue finally changing into a more humane, city-run street, there are growing concerns that its lack of bike access and/or a compromised plan for bus service might not let it reach its full potential.
When it comes to potential, Biketown’s year was mixed. The quality and quantity of e-bikes and e-scoters in our bike share system went up, but the lack of bikes overall and the relative cost of rentals still kneecaps what could be a transformative transportation option.
There are reasons for optimism in 2025. Big projects, big funding, and big structural changes should make an impact.
We’ve got a new slate of leaders in Portland and a new form of government to empower them. PBOT no longer has to answer to one politician and should have a more stable trajectory as a result. Our new 12-member council will have some sort of transportation committee, and with a strong “Bike Happy Hour majority” in place we should expect strong awareness of our issues that (hopefully!) translates into priority and good policy.
Oregon House Rep. Khanh Pham at a stop on ODOT’s listening tour for the 2025 transportation package. As a member of the Joint Committee on Transportation, she could play a key role in the upcoming session’s debate about funding.
2025 will be the year of funding for transportation. At the state level, lawmakers and lobbyists (aka advocates) will debate a multi-billion funding package for the Oregon Department of Transportation. Given the work of the Move Oregon Forward coalition (The Street Trust and Oregon Walks are steering committee members), we’re likely to see hundreds of millions dedicated toward biking, walking and transit. And if they try to leave our stuff at the side of the road, we’ve got the very transparent and comprehensive listening tour to fall back on as proof of what the majority of Oregonians want (hint: it’s not larger freeways and highways).
Locally, the Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability will launch a long-awaited, $20 million e-bike rebate program in the summer of 2025 and we’ll see the first batch of an expected 6,000 new e-bikes that will hit the streets in the next five years as a result of this investment.
Bringing it back to PBOT… the bureau’s desperate need for new revenue and the new faces on city council tasked with coming up with ways to create it, will be one of the most intriguing things to watch in 2025.
What new revenue source will PBOT (and ODOT for that matter) arrive at?
What impact will the new e-bike rebate program have on our streets?
What type of transit will 82nd Avenue get?
Will Good Samaritans be ready to make a significant dent in bike lane maintenance before spring?
What will the freeway industrial complex demand in compromises for raising fees on driving and funding biking, walking and transit at the state level?
Will Portland City Council follow through on promises to make safer streets a priority?
These are just some of the questions I’ve got at the start of a new years. What are yours?
