The start of construction on the North Willamette Boulevard Active Transportation Corridor project is a joyous occasion for many folks who’ve waited years for major safety upgrades. On a personal level, I’m beyond excited for the transformation of a busy bicycling corridor I’ve biked and driven on thousands of times in the past 20 years.
That’s why I was surprised and disappointed to see a Facebook post* last week from Oregon House Representative Travis Nelson (*note that the original post is in a private group, so that link goes to a different, public post with a different comment thread). In what I’ve almost come to expect once a high-profile, bike-related project breaks ground, Rep. Nelson posted: “Are you all aware of the dramatic changes coming to Willamette Boulevard? I wasn’t made aware and I’m the State Rep. Do you approve of the changes? Why or why not?” (The post then linked to a BikePortland story from January 2025.)
Rep Nelson — a Democrat, Registered Nurse and grandson of Louisiana sharecroppers — was first elected to represent North and Northeast Portland in 2022, seemed to be making a classic anti-bike move: shield opposition to a project by complaining about the integrity of the process. But there’s more to Nelson’s concerns than he first revealed.
“DEI matters. I’ve reached out to 2 of the peninsula’s Black Churches… They knew nothing about the project.”
– Rep. Travis Nelson
Right on cue, Nelson’s post (see it below) triggered several pointed responses. He gave some folks an opportunity to post nasty things like: “They need to get the f out of the way bikes and joggers running in the middle of the f street,” “Always fcking up traffic in this city for bicycles,” “Absolutely over the catering to bikers,” and “Make them pay for bike license.”
The more thoughtful (and readable) posts came from people who support the project and didn’t appreciate Nelson’s framing. “Super disappointed to see you posting this,” said one person who added that they’ve lived on Willamette Blvd for 34 years and have, “watched crashes in front of our house over and over again.” This resident — who posted several photos of collisions and skid marks on their lawn — worried that Nelson’s post would, “empower those who want to continue the status quo so they can simply speed on my street.”
Another person commented: “This is really irresponsible for an elected official to post. Just because you missed something doesn’t mean it wasn’t well communicated.”
My feelers went up not just because I know how posts like Nelson’s often rile up the anti-bike base, but because I’ve seen this particular movie many times. The Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) has a history of being relatively far along on a project like this (one that makes major street design changes that benefit non-drivers) — only to have a notable person or group stand up and say they were left in the dark. It can be a powerful tactic depending on who stands up. When the person is Black and claims the group who wasn’t included in the outreach were BIPOC Portlanders — PBOT will often change course. On North Williams Avenue, PBOT restarted the outreach process after some Black residents said the outreach process was racist. On NE 7th Avenue, a similar thing happened when Black residents spoke out and PBOT ultimately gave up on a groundbreaking greenway project design many folks were very excited about. On NE 33rd, PBOT took the extraordinary step of removing a bike lane that had just been installed.
In the case of N Willamette Blvd, Nelson told commenters on Facebook that the intention of his post was to simply start a conversation. “I posted here not to express judgment, but because I wanted to know if I was the only one who missed the memo. Based on feedback l’ve received, I’m far from being alone.”
In an exchange with Rep. Nelson on Bluesky yesterday, he explained to me that his concerns about the process are, “rooted in equity and inclusion.” “When I ran for this seat in 2022, I ran in part because of George Floyd’s murder. DEI matters,” he wrote. “I’ve reached out to 2 of the peninsula’s Black Churches near Lombard [an arterial several blocks away]. They knew nothing about the project.”
In other replies, Nelson clarified that he wanted to know how PBOT used a racial equity lens to ensure that non-English speakers were properly notified about the project. A public involvement summary on the project website reveal it went through a robust public process with over 30 public meetings since 2021. Nelson says he reviewed that information and still wants to know more about what role racial equity played. He says he’s reached out to PBOT to share his concerns.
Beyond PBOT’s outreach process, I asked Nelson if he had critiques about any other element of the project. “I’m concerned that traffic will be diverted to narrow side streets where some turns are limited,” he replied. Nelson was referring to new turn restrictions coming to some intersections.
“Do you think some traffic diversion and turn restrictions are an acceptable trade-off for the benefits of the project?” I asked him.
“It’s critical to me that the process be right,” Nelson replied. “There is a lot of generational racial trauma in N & NE. Vanport, redlining, urban renewal & the demolition for I-5 have had a long lasting impact. I don’t want people who feel like their voices haven’t been heard to be steamrolled by another project.”
This $6 million project (a mix of federal and local funds) is already under construction and should be finished by September of this year. Given the public process PBOT has done, it would be highly unusual for them to make major changes to the design. But like I said, everything can change when racism becomes part of the conversation. Hopefully PBOT has done their homework and can navigate this situation.
To be clear, while Rep. Nelson has concerns about the process, he supports the changes. “I’m 95% good with the project,” he shared on Bluesky Monday. “We absolutely need safer streets.”
I’ve reached out to PBOT for comment and will update this post when I hear back.
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.
As his constituent, I would urge Rep. Nelson to think twice about making these “open ended” remarks that invite such strong disparagement for a group of his constituents, especially since this project will actually provide better facilities for the joggers and bikers who are apparently so annoying to drivers. (Didn’t realize that joggers also caused such a strong response!) Considering he’s a member of the Working Families party, he should be thrilled by the bus stop treatments coming with this construction. I think he’s also voted in favor of “protecting workers from climate change,” and this type of multi-modal project is so clearly a climate justice-friendly project. Inviting drivers to complain bout bicyclists and joggers is such a car-brain move. I expected better of someone who’s clearly a smart guy and holds as much power as he does.
On a larger point, why does the notification process matter so much if the project results are ok and ultimately beneficial to everyone? Is it that construction is disruptive to churches specifically? Are their parking lots going to be blocked off for some length of time, or will their regular meetings be interrupted by construction noise? If that’s the case, it would be more appropriate for the churches to coordinate with PBOT to mitigate the disruption to any services. I can see how Rep. Nelson could be useful in that coordination. Otherwise this is just throwing his power around and complaining about the perennial nuisance of construction projects and meddling in a project that’s already broken ground. Everyone gets annoyed with construction. Instead of blaming our neighbors for it, we should be bonding over how annoying it is and then celebrating when it’s done and we each get our own lanes to use.
If he wants to complain about unexpected and nuisance construction, I would love to chat with him about some ADA curb cuts at Vancouver/Williams and N Killingsworth that were so shoddily done the first time that a second crew had to come through recently and smooth them out. I got stopped by flaggers twice on my bike on my way to work (with no notice!), and then spent the better part of a week navigating around the Williams/Killingsworth intersection which got closed completely on the north side. What a nuisance! But at least now the curb cuts are smoother.
The churches he is talking about aren’t close to the project’s impacts by his own admission in the article. So there aren’t any construction related or access issues for those churches. It sounds like he’s saying that two black churches on a different street were not aware of a project on Willamette.
Well said, as usual, Paige. I, too, am Nelson’s constituent, and your words express my feelings aptly.
This is a PBOT project, and it’s in District 2. I’d like to hear from the district 2 councilors regarding their take (Sameer Kanal, Elana Pirtle-Guiney, and Dan Ryan.) I’d especially like to hear from Kanal, as a member of the progressive caucus and a person of color, about whether he has concerns about proper outreach and DEI.
Does DEI also extend to our LGBTQ+ neighbors? After all, as some big-brained commenters pointed out riding bikes is gay.
Just FYI Rep Nelson is the first openly LGBTQ+ man of color and the first openly LGBTQ+ African American to ever serve in the Oregon Legislature.
Ok, point taken. At any rate it seems the “bikes are gay” comments have been deleted so there’s that I guess.
You’d think as a healthcare professional he would understand the value of making a street safer in order to preserve life and limb even if it means a little inconvenience to drivers. For him to describe it as a “drastic change” is disingenuous. For the average car driver the experience will not materially change in any significant way.
Oh ****, not this equity means bike lanes are bad bullshit again.
Bikes are simultaneously only for brokies without a car and only practical for rich gentrifiers. I wish people would drop all the identity politics and just say “I don’t like bikes”
well, the last quote from Rep. Nelson is encouraging.
It is always interesting in these contexts when the destructive legacy of racist planning processes gets invoked, just because, you know, there is a very real difference between running a freeway through a neighborhood and building some daggone bike lanes in terms of the actual consequences of the project. And it is just such a car-brained thing to compare mild inconveniences to drivers as a result of a safety-improvement project to demolishing black neighborhoods.
Walter Sobchak: Those rich fucks! This whole fucking thing… I did not watch my buddies die face down in the muck so that this fucking strumpet…
The Dude: I don’t see any connection to Vietnam, Walter.
Walter Sobchak: Well, there isn’t a literal connection, Dude.
The Dude: Walter, face it, there isn’t any connection.
The Dude abides.
Ok. I’ll bite.
I live on a busy street. I don’t love the fact that it’s a busy street. When traffic is really going (9 am – 7 pm) and my neighbor is in their yard, we have to stand pretty much right next to each other *and* project our voices to have a conservation.
Why does the “harm” of moving e.g., 10 more cars per hour in front of someone else’s house outweigh the benefit of potential moving e.g., 10 fewer cars per hour in front of my house?
Are there any risks that church goers will no longer be able to attend services? Does PBOT normally run projects by religious groups for Divine Approval? Do these churches really need to be kept in the loop, like special engagement somehow? This isn’t a secret project.
Here’s a history of the projects public outreach. This is weak bullshit to bring up Vanport and I-5 and how these church attendees don’t want to be “steamrolled”. This is a public safety project that will benefit everyone that uses Willamette, this isn’t an attack on anyone. GODDAMNIT.
Like many others here, I think Rep Nelson’s baity post is unhelpful, arouses the worst online anti-bike trolls, and stifles rather than invites meaningful discourse. It’s a well-worn pattern that pits cyclists against people and communities who have been and continue to be harmed by racist and classist automobile infrastructure.
And…Black churches are an important place to do outreach. While Portland has a reputation of being un-churched, it’s my understanding Black churches are a core community hub—not just for worship, but for organizing, social support, and sharing information. I remember once hearing announcements about health when I visited a church in N Portland on a Sunday morning, which I believe were a regular part of Sunday worship.
So knock Rep Nelson’s style and getting caught up in anti-bike rhetoric. But cycling advocates and PBOT should learn important lessons of where to do good community engagement.
Do the members of the church, including the pastor, even live in the neighborhood?
If they do live there, what did they do with the flyer they would have received about the project? Throw it away like most people (I’m one of those types)?
Does the church have a newsletter they pass out on Sunday? (the last church I went to 30+ years ago did) Did it include information on local city projects going on?
What proactive actions does the church take to find out what’s going on in the neighborhood they represent?
Does the neighborhood association for that part of town have a newsletter? Mine does and they list out the various City/County/State projects going on in my neighborhood.
Can part of the lack of knowledge also be put on the church and its members? PBOT cannot in any way force people to pay attention to the projects they do.
Maybe it’s really not about DEI afterall, and just human nature as most of us (I’m way guilty of it) just don’t pay attention to the flyers we get in the mail. I know I recycle mine about as fast I as I pull them out of my mailbox.
Be careful who you vote for mate…..if you want this to change.
I live in a city (Greensboro NC pop 300,000) where African-Americans and African immigrants (which groups the census lumps together) are a plurality followed by non-Latinx whites, and 6 out of 9 city councilors are African-Americans, who regularly DEMAND that any useful bicycle infrastructure be put in the predominantly African-American districts before they are put in the predominantly white districts – our city has been earnestly trying for decades (so far unsuccessfully) to gentrify certain African-American sections of town with bike facilities, farmer’s markets, trendy housing, recreation centers, express bus, etc. So I find it incredibly ironic when an African-American elected official in any overwhelmingly white jurisdiction, particularly outside of the Deep South, starts to object to bike facilities or any other progressive infrastructure.
That makes sense, but unfortunately in Portland, there has been a narrative going back to the Williams Ave bike lane project, that bike lanes are racist, they are the cause of housing cost increases, that cycling is just for white elites, and bike lanes are the reason that black folks were displaced.
There is a whole generation of pro-car anti-bike black leadership in Portland that were brought up on this toxic narrative over the last two decades. A major proponent of this talking point, was promoted heavily in the early 2010s by the current director of PBOT.
Yep – I had similar thoughts when I saw Nelson’s objections. A good chunk of well-meaning white liberals in Portland are automatically triggered whenever a Black person in power brings up racist wrongs. It’s a big power move that Black leaders pull out with some regularity in Portland. I must say I’m really disappointed that Nelson did it here. He is burning up a lot of goodwill in the process.
Yeah, we hear the same narrative out here, except the census says that a majority of our local cyclists who commute to work are actually African-American, but most are either students at our two public universities or homeless adults trying to bike to industrial jobs along narrow unlit stroads in parts of the city without public transit – in other words, groups of people who often don’t vote. I hear similar complaints from bike advocates in Durham, Raleigh, and Charlotte of the utter cluelessness that their elected officials, including African-American elected officials, have about how many and who their local bicyclist community actually are.
Our elected officials don’t care about cyclists as people or as constituents, instead they care about having modern bicycle facilities to increase the prestige of their communities, which in turn sells more homes (an amazing number of elected officials are directly or indirectly connected to the realty industry, including many African-Americans) and increases their chances for re-election.
If you ever want to make huge progress on bike, walk, and transit advocacy, enlist the help of your incredibly friendly rich type-A realtor industry. Yeah, they don’t really care about safety or mode split or saving the planet, it’s just not their thing, they only care about selling homes to rich buyers, but they do care about having good-quality bicycle, walking, and transit connections in order to sell those homes to rich buyers – they want what you want, but for other reasons – and they are very well-connected to your local VIPs, politicians, and rich people.
The City of Portland does put resources into communication across language barriers. I get a fair number of messages from the Parks department and it’s routine to see links for eight or ten languages.
I am personally in full support of this project as someone who cycles through that area weekly to get from SE to St Johns. However, it does seem like a huge oversight for PBOT to not have reached out to these community groups especially when they already had to restart the listening process from not listening to the Black community well. I hope that this can be a learning opportunity for PBOT and that this project will have community support.
Matt, methinks thou dost protest too much. Why does one segment of the community get special consideration beyond the public-involvement processes we have all agreed to? I regularly miss out on opportunities to have my say just cuz I’m kinda busy in my own little world (4th-Ave project is a good example). But I don’t get to say, “Hey! Stop the project! I wasn’t paying attention!” I know the big difference here is that the Black population in NoPo was abused horribly in the past, but that doesn’t mean everything has to stop when someone objects.
Would an Oregon State Representative be routinely notified about a street project in their district? The outreach seems to be based on nearby addresses and probably neighborhood associations. A person who doesn’t see Bike Portland, tosses out their second class mail, and skips the NA might not know about a project until they see the flaggers.
I live in the neighborhood and got lots of mailers about it by PBOT
My only real complaint is that the money could’ve been used to finish more last-mile connections, which is what I see as the biggest failure of our current network. For example, connecting the end or some part of the Willamette route better into downtown St. John’s, Lombard toward pier park, the N. terminal road gap, or possibly repaving the path the connects PIR to N. Portland road (it’s currently passable if you’re a gravel enthusiast). Not to say Willamette couldn’t use improvements in places either, but it did have recent upgrades as already (why not do it right the first, or even second time?). To me it looks less like a failure to consider DEI than a failure to prioritize project funding wisely.
Ah yes, the Portland veto: just whisper “equity process” three times and the bike lane disappears, mate.
We’ve seen this episode before. Project goes through years of outreach, open houses, design tweaks, federal funding lined up… then suddenly it’s Schrödinger’s Bike Lane: simultaneously 95% supported and somehow an existential threat to racial justice.
Of course equity matters. Deeply. But if every safety upgrade can be frozen at the eleventh hour because someone important “missed the memo,” we’re not doing equity, we’re doing paralysis. Meanwhile the crashes keep happening right on schedule.
At some point we’ve got to decide: are we building safer streets, or are we just building new ways to stall them?
Maybe it’s just time to move past DEI. It feels like the national moment for it has passed, and a lot of Americans have moved on or grown skeptical. More importantly, it’s increasingly being used as a way to stall or kill projects that would deliver real, tangible improvements. Centering every decision around racial justice rhetoric might have been well-intentioned, but in practice it often just freezes progress. At some point, we need to focus on outcomes and move forward.
I’m impressed by how little response he got to his clickbait post. 5 reactions and 23 comments from 16 people. Tempest in a teapot.
Like I tried to clarify in the post, the link I shared in the story is not the only place it was posted. The original location of the post is a private FB group that the mods haven’t let me join yet. On that post there are hundreds of comments… so it definitely got noticed.
Ahhh! Sorry to miss that. Totally appreciate your awesome attention to detail.
“I’m 95% good with the project,” (but casually stir the pot with issues & concerns that have 100% cancelled, and removed, previous projects.) What IS the agenda/goal here?!
Is it possible that State Rep. Nelson is suggesting that local Portland bike advocates need to reach out to the local traditionally African-American churches and church leaders and work to develop a long-term relationship and alliance for needed improvements? That it might be to the benefit of everyone if they did? If, as several people say, PBOT is so scared of the racism card, maybe if some influential members of the local African-American churches and church leaders could be convinced of the relative benefits of good-quality bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure by Portland advocates, what do you think might be an overall benefit of such an alliance?