New plan to boost cycling would capitalize on existing infrastructure

North Interstate Ave. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

Could paying organizers to blanket neighborhoods with groups rides and a marketing campaign that spreads the good word about bicycling spur a Portland cycling renaissance? That’s a key question some advocates, insiders, and at least one Portland city council member are seriously pondering this week as ideas swirl around City Hall for how best to spend a $15 million chunk of climate tax revenue.

This funding is being debated as the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability goes through its annual adjustment of the Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund (PCEF) Climate Investment Plan (CIP). The PCEF Committee has recommended an adjustment that would transfer $15 million from electric vehicle subsidies to home energy retrofits. But that change isn’t final and councilors see an opportunity to chart a different path for that funding. You might recall my story last month about how City Councilor Mitch Green wants to use the $15 million to backfill TriMet’s budget and rescue them from “doom loop” of service cuts.

Now Councilor Steve Novick, who has a history of pushing for higher transportation spending from the PCEF tax, has come forward with an idea of his own. This issue was first discussed at the City Council Climate, Resilience, and Land Use Committee on January 15th and a more robust conversation is planned for the next meeting on January 29th.

One of the ideas Novick supports is based on an intriguing plan to boost bicycle ridership first covered by BikePortland in November 2024. It’s an idea championed by noted bike planner Roger Geller, who’s led the Portland Bureau of Transportation’s bicycle program for over 30 years. Here’s the gist: Geller and Novick believe that since the bike network has improved dramatically in the past decade while ridership has cratered, what’s needed now is a grassroots effort to get people to actually use it.

In 2024 Geller told the city’s bicycle advisory committee: “You can’t watch anything on TV during the football season without seeing five Bud Light ads over the course of an hour right? That’s the level of campaigning that I want to do for biking. That’s what I think we need.”

The idea came and went for most of us, but Geller has never stopped thinking about it. Now with the opportunity for funding presented by PCEF, the plan’s moment in the spotlight has arrived.

At last week’s Climate Committee meeting (which Novick co-chairs), Bicycle Advisory Committee Chair Jim Middaugh hinted at the plan: “We have a world-class system that gets people on their bikes. There is clearly opportunities for more investment to make that system better, but we can also make the most of it today by encouraging people to bike.”

Due to his role as BAC chair, Middaugh has certainly been privy to renewed interest in Geller’s plan from Councilor Novick. One element of the plan — that appears to be just one part of a more fleshed-out and formalized version of Geller’s 2024 memo — was posted on the BikeLoud Slack channel by bike bus advocate Rob Galanakis a few days ago. It reads:

This effort will see PBOT contract with an organization who will enlist coaches who will be responsible for lead rides and encourage participation.  Each coach would be responsible for an area that encompasses 1 square mile or approximately 4,500 households. 

Coaches would: 

  • Lead regularly scheduled, advertised rides in neighborhoods throughout a project target area. Rides would reliably leave daily from set locations at set times. 
  • Promote the rides throughout their assigned area of the project target area. Promotion would be in the form of door-to-door canvassing, putting up flyers in neighborhood destinations and attending events and public meetings.
  • Depending on scale, the effort could reach up to 181,000 of Portland’s 304,000 households in the following neighborhoods: Central City, Interstate Corridor, Lents-Foster, Montavilla, Hollywood, MLK-Alberta, Belmont-Hawthorne-Division, Woodstock and Sellwood-Moreland-Brooklyn.

As you can see, the plan would be akin to a get-out-the-vote campaign, but for cycling. And this is just one element of the bike marketing plan. If what Novick’s cooking up tracks with Geller’s 2024 vision, it would also include a few high-visibility network improvements, a professional marketing campaign, and demonstrations of political support. I hope to share the full plan soon so you can see the whole enchilada and make your judgments based on that. But for now, what are your general thoughts about this approach?

Councilor Novick sounds like he wants to give it a try. “I tend to agree with Roger that since infrastructure has improved somewhat over the last decade but ridership has plummeted, we should at least consider some non-infrastructure ideas,” he told me yesterday.

Novick says we can expect an in-depth discussion about this and other ideas for how best to spend the $15 million, at the Climate Committee meeting next week (January 29th). Stay tuned.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Founder of BikePortland (in 2005). Father of three. North Portlander. Basketball lover. Car driver. If you have questions or feedback about this site or my work, contact me via email at maus.jonathan@gmail.com, or phone/text at 503-706-8804. Also, if you read and appreciate this site, please become a paying subscriber.

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.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

10 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
2WheelsGood
2WheelsGood
2 hours ago

climate tax revenue

You mean PCEF money, which was intended for transition to clean energy (the CE in PCEF), not marketing bike riding in Portland.

We’ve done stuff like this before, and we know it doesn’t work. The rise and fall of biking in Portland is not a marketing issue; it’s one of cultural trends, and there is nothing sadder than the government trying to make something cool.

If Portland wants to fight climate change, we should be putting all our money into heat pumps, home insulation, and electrifying any engines running on fossil fuel (reserving maybe $15M or so for a marketing campaign to make veganism cool).

2WheelsGood
2WheelsGood
44 minutes ago

I ride a lot and I think bikes are great. I am part of a multigenerational bike family. I am not biased against bikes. I am biased in favor of getting results.

Every time we piss away another chunk of PCEF money on things like sweeping streets or marketing bicycling, we lose a chance to make a real, albeit small, impact on the climate crisis.

cultural trends [don’t] just happen organically

If we could get the mastermind behind Portland’s big bike surge in the 2000s back to do it again, it would be $15M well spent. But of course we can’t, because that trend was organic, not the result of yet another hapless PBOT marketing campaign.

There’s basically one strategy that can be implemented at the city level that we know works — electrifying everything, and converting our electricity generation to renewables. Everything else is a distraction.

JR
JR
44 minutes ago
Reply to  2WheelsGood

Totally agree. I love biking, but group rides aren’t going to get me to bike more when I don’t have a good bikeway connection to my destination in the winter when it’s dark out super early. I would love to see this money going to building insulation, heat pumps, etc. which is what I thought I was voting for back then.

Tommy
Tommy
1 hour ago

spend that money on celebrating year round bike use

David Hampsten
David Hampsten
1 hour ago

Depending on scale, the effort could reach up to 181,000 of Portland’s 304,000 households in the following neighborhoods: Central City, Interstate Corridor, Lents-Foster, Montavilla, Hollywood, MLK-Alberta, Belmont-Hawthorne-Division, Woodstock and Sellwood-Moreland-Brooklyn.

Which is another way of PBOT admitting that the bike infrastructure they have (or lack) in other parts of town kinda suck.

PBOT used to to this same sort of thing with Timo Forsberg’s “Smart Trips” group back in the early 2000’s.

I think a better solution is spending $15 million to bribe outright bicyclists to ride – if you want 100,000 new riders, that would be $150 per person…

FlowerPower
FlowerPower
6 minutes ago
Reply to  David Hampsten

“I think a better solution is spending $15 million to bribe outright bicyclists to ride – if you want 100,000 new riders, that would be $150 per person…”

It would definitely be the more honest route, as well as more accountable of where the money was going as well as measurable.
I like the idea Novick and Geller are coming up with, it sounds a bit like a lot of bike busses for adults. However, using PCEF funds no matter how legally appropriated for a marketing campaign is just too much. If the spending goes through and no matter how much I support the end result, is there anything left that the funds can’t be appropriated to do?
I see the PCEF committee is still hiring for unpaid (but incredibly powerful having control of so much money) volunteers. We could do away with that committee and just put the money into the general fund. No more need for legal shenanigans whenever the City Council finds itself short of funds.

Jonno
Jonno
49 minutes ago

I dunno about the idea that infrastructure has improved thus so should ridership. Infrastructure has not improved evenly or completely, and in many cases it has been compromised to preserve car access (20s bikeway, I’m still bitter. And how about 7th Avenue?). Despite better Naito and 4th ave and NW Flanders bridge and some other good projects, it’s quite clear to the casual observer that cars still rule, so why not join them. Heck, an uber for two is usually cheaper than Biketown for two!

SD
SD
37 minutes ago

Step 1. Find a brick building downtown to paint a huge mural that says “Welcome to America’s Bicycle Capital”

Step 2. Pay off the Oregonian to stop writing trash anti-bike editorials.

Step 3. Obtain Kompromat on Portland Metro Chamber executives to stop them from sabotaging everything that is good.

Step 4. Hire drivers to drive the speed limit side by side on high crash corridors to slow speeding traffic and model good behavior at pedestrian crossings.

Step 5. Install a mole at a high level of ODOT.

https://bikeportland.org/2014/05/06/city-of-portland-orders-removal-of-americas-bike-capital-mural-from-downtown-wall-105559

FlowerPower
FlowerPower
1 minute ago
Reply to  SD

Step 6. Put up huuuuge banners saying “Trump hates bicycles! No more cycling” and then sit back and enjoy the crowded bike lanes.