🚨 Please note that BikePortland slows down during this time of year as I have family in town and just need a break! Please don't expect typical volume of news stories and content. I'll be back in regular form after the new year. Thanks. - Jonathan 🙏
Emergency Naked Bike Ride participants on Naito Parkway on October 13th. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Getting out on bikes with friends old and new on the first day of the year is a proud Portland tradition. If you want to take part, and start the new year on a positive pedaling note, I’ve got five ride ideas for you to consider.
From the “Ding Ding Ride” that starts at midnight, to a plunge in the Willamette — and even something in Washington County — check below for all the details you’ll need. (Note: Times listed are meet-up times, because it’s fun to get there with time to spare.)
Midnight Ding Ding Ride – 12:00 am Ladd Circle (SE)
Join in for a special edition of this fun and simple “ding ding” tradition. Just show up and ride laps of the 0.16-mile circle and ring your bike bell. Get their before midnight to get the full New Year’s Eve experience. Ladd Circle is a special place in Portland bike culture lore and it’ll be a great spot to be on this auspicious evening. More info here.
All Bodies on Bikes New Year’s Day Ride, Polar Plunge and Sauna – 11:30 am at Crema Coffee (SE Ankeny)
All Bodies on Bikes is a national nonprofit that works to make cycling more inclusive and welcome to everyone. Now that its co-founder Marley Blonsky has moved to Portland, she’ll lead this ride that includes a fun and new (to Portland) twist: a dip in the Willamette River! Expect a 5.5 mile ride to Sellwood Park for the plunge and a fun mix of folks on all types of bikes. There’s also a sauna to warm up on afterwards (RSVP required). More info here.
Portland Bicycling Club New Year’s Day Ride – 12 noon at Wilshire Park (NE)
If you’re looking for a more moderately paced, traditional “road ride” (where most folks will be in lycra), hook up with members of the Portland Bicycling Club, the oldest bike club in the area. This ride will be led by Doug Myers, who says the route is 16 miles and the pace will be set at about 13-15 mph. Non-members are welcome. More info here.
The New Year’s Day Ride – 12 noon at The Cart Blocks (North Park Blocks on W Burnside)
Called The New Year’s Ride because it’s a proud tradition that has been organized by various cycling clubs and organizations since the 1950s. Come out and join its current hosts, The Street Trust, for an eight-mile ride around the city that will include a spin along the new protected bike lane on SW 4th Avenue and end at the new bike tunnel through the Portland Art Museum. Registration (and donation) required, but no one turned away due to lack of funds. More info here.
Ride Westside New Year’s Day Ride – 12 noon at The Round/Beaverton Central Station (Washington County)
The grassroots Ride Westside has had a solid year of growth as they’ve tapped into huge demand for more bike rides and bike advocacy in Washington County. If you’re on the west side and are tired of having to come to Portland for your bike fun fix, now you can find your people closer to home! I confirmed with the ride leader this morning, so if the event listing page lacks details, just check back later today for all the info. More info here.
I made this video after I was nearly left-hooked while riding the brand new (and totally wonderful!) protected bike lane on SW 4th Avenue in downtown Portland last week. Then today I learned my friend Marley Blonsky was injured in a right-hook while biking on the new bike lanes on NE Broadway at 21st.
Portland is doing great work improving our streets. That’s a great thing. But I wanted to underscore that as long as we have so many drivers who don’t drive safely and who disregard the well-being of fellow road users, there will still be risks of collisions.
One of Portland’s newly upgraded — and now ticketing! — automated enforcement cameras. (Photo: City of Portland)
The City of Portland is cautiously optimistic about fatal traffic crash trends as the transportation bureau reports a “dramatic drop in deaths” over the past two years. As of Monday (12/22), PBOT has recorded 39 traffic deaths, a 32% drop compared with a year ago and a 39% decline compared with the same period in 2023.
Today the Portland Bureau of Transportation said the trend is “encouraging” and that it might have something to do with a decline in excessive speeding — a behavior that spiked during the pandemic.
PBOT is also encouraged because their phalanx of automated enforcement cameras that had been offline since August are coming back. By tomorrow (12/23), 22 of the 39 (or so) cameras in the network are once again enforcing either speed and/or red signal violations. You might recall that back in August PBOT announced they would switch vendors and replace all of their existing cameras with new, more effective models. That switch is complete and now it’s just a matter of getting all the new cameras up and running.
This is good news for road safety advocates and for the City of Portland, who desperately wants to prevent traffic deaths and needs the revenue these citations generate. Enforcement cameras also happen to be a very popular program. Last fall, PBOT and the Portland Police Bureau surveyed around 2,000 Portlanders about the cameras. PBOT says 82% of respondents support using intersection cameras (speed and signal) and 76% support speed cameras as a way to enforce laws. The survey also found that 94% of respondents were aware of the cameras and 71% felt it was a fair way to enforce traffic laws.
Now PBOT hopes these cameras (from NovoaGlobal), along with all the other work they’re doing to make streets safer, will result in fewer people being killed on our roads. “If people continue to travel safely through Dec. 31,” reads a PBOT statement shared today. “Portland appears to be making significant improvement from the pandemic era travel patterns that saw traffic deaths by people in vehicles triple from 9 in 2018 to a high of 32 in 2023.”
In 2024, PBOT counted 57 people killed in traffic crashes, down from a 30-year record high of 69 in 2023. In 2019, the year before the pandemic, 48 people lost their lives in traffic crashes. The average from 2015 to 2019 was 41 deaths.*
Perhaps we are making progress. But it’s far too early to celebrate. For now, please just drive slower! If you do speed, there’s a much better chance you will kill or seriously hurt another person when you collide with them. Or if that fate doesn’t befall you, you might just receive a very expensive photograph in the mail.
*BikePortland’s Fatality Tracker has a higher number because I count deaths that PBOT excludes from their tally due to federal guidelines, such as collisions with TriMet vehicles, suicides, and deaths that happen months after the initial incident.
Happy holidays everyone! I’ve got family coming into town and my eldest daughter’s birthday is tomorrow, so I’ll be away from my desk for most of the rest of the week. Note that Bike Happy Hour won’t be held the next two weeks since Migration will be closed for Christmas and New Years Eve (both of which fall on Wednesdays this year!).
Now get caught up with the most notable stories I came across in the past week…
Too bad for Rad: Following an ugly disagreement with federal regulators over a major battery recall, the once dominant Rad Power Bikes has filed for bankruptcy. Their top liability claim is to the U.S. government whom they owe over $8 million in tariffs. The company says they’re not giving up and hope to complete a sale of the company soon. (Bicycle Retailer & Industry News)
Musk gonna’ Musk: I can’t believe it’s not an Onion article, but the “Mad Max Mode” from Tesla is back and it’s as stupid and dangerous as ever. The fact that our government doesn’t just regulate and/or sanction Tesla out of business is how I know we are not serious about road safety. (Fast Company)
Good car tech: While Tesla is an example of bad car tech, Mitsubishi’s new AI-powered drunk driver detection system is an example of good car tech. (Car Scoops)
Transit politics: The government of Spain has introduced a flat-fee public transit pass they say is an example of how they make lives better for regular people, but critics see it as a political play to distract from scandals. (The Guardian)
Bike lanes and traffic: When the City of Boston installed more (and better) bike lanes citywide in 2023, an analysis of traffic patterns the following year showed a marked increase in bike traffic and a significant decrease in car traffic. (Good News Network)
New unpaved route! I’m genuinely inspired and excited to learn about the new “Golden Gravel” route — a 3,800 route created by Adventure Cycling that’s almost entirely unpaved and that starts on the Oregon Coast. (Singletracks)
When biking and walking mix: Fascinating debate in Brussels about a ban on bicycling through a popular pedestrian zone in the name of safety and how the alternate route for bicycle riders creates safety problems of its own. (The Guardian)
The Big Pause: After “No Tax Oregon” petitioners reached the required amount of signatures, state transportation funding passed last legislative session is on pause while roads fall into hillsides and the Democrats and Republicans gird for a fight in the upcoming short session. (Oregon Capital Chronicle)
Austerity and audacity: The same Republicans who celebrate the defunding of ODOT are now calling on Governor Kotek to release emergency funding to make up the difference. The audacity! (OPB)
Fewer ride share customers: For the most recent City of Portland fiscal year (ending June 30), the number of local trips on Uber or Lyft was down 37% from 2019 — a decrease ride share companies attribute to increased fees and regulations. (The Oregonian)
Where bike messengers still thrive: While bicycle messengers are a rare or dying breed in most cities , there’s still a successful bike courier business in Chicago. It’s worker-owned and it has a reputation for delivering the goods for popular local restaurants. (Block Club Chicago)
What impact will the City of Portland’s e-bike rebate program have? How exactly does the process work? What type of people will take advantage of it? These are just some of the questions I’ve pondered as the date nears for the program to launch this coming spring. And yesterday I biked through an atmospheric river to find the answers.
In the video above you’ll meet Liraz Brand, a 22-year-old Reed College grad and nursing student who got a free e-bike thanks to the Portland Rides PCEF E-Bike Rebate Program. The program soft launched to Portland Community College students back in September and Brand jumped at the opportunity. The $1,600 rebate and additional $300 for accessories, got Brand into a new Trek that she adores and it’s given her much more than just a new way to get around.
“It’s been really nice. I’ve been really enjoying not being in my car.”
“It’s been really nice. I’ve been really enjoying not being in my car,” Brand shared with me during an interview under a leaky outdoor dining patio on Southeast Division where she stopped in for a chat on her way to work. Brand’s car is in disrepair, her other bike got stolen, and she finds the bus too unreliable. But she’s got major mobility needs. She splits her class time between two PCC campuses — one near SE 82nd, the other on N Killingsworth — that are nearly nine miles apart. Then she works in Sellwood, which is in a completely different part of town. Despite those distances, and despite taking up daily cycling in fall and winter, she’s smitten with cycling: “I’ve been having really beautiful interactions with people on the trails. I get to ride the riverfront back from work every day. I’ve been seeing deer and the wildlife of Portland come out, which has been really cool. Yeah, I’ve been loving it.” Brand says getting out of her car has helped her mood and made her days easier to manage. She also finds Portland’s bike infrastructure “incredible,” “next-level,” and, “a cut above” compared to her hometown of Boston, Massachusetts.
As for the e-bike rebate program, she found the process easy to use. After winning a lottery drawing, she received a code for her discount. She then brought that code to the Trek Bicycle Store in Sellwood and they set her up on the bike she wanted, a baby blue Trek FX-2. Brand was also able to purchase a set of pannier bags, a u-lock, a helmet and rain pants with the accessory rebate.
Portland’s rebate program is possible due to a grant from the Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund (PCEF) and it’s operated by the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability. Everything is funneled through a non-city website (thank god) at PortlandEbikeRebate.com, which Brand said was a bit “clunky” but it did the job.
As I’ve reported, the program will tap into $20 million from the PCEF fund (which comes from a tax on large corporations) to support an estimated 6,000 new e-bike purchases over the next five years.
If those e-bikes have as much impact as the one that went to Brand, Portland will be much better for it.
Thanks to everyone who came out to enjoy BikeCraft last night. We packed Migration Brewing with all the warmth, smiles, and festive fun that got me so excited about this event way back in 2005. Imagine being nostalgic for something, then having that same feeling return 20 years later!
Luckily the sky stayed dry and — despite the chilly air — it was a very tolerable winter night. We even turned on the outdoor fire pits and folks hung out under the stars. Vendors reported brisk sales and it seemed like everyone left with something they were excited about. But BikeCraft was never just about buying and selling. It’s also about all of us bike people coming together in the dead of winter to check out cool things and hang out.
Aaron tries on a Double Darn cap.Iris from Reflective Society.Sole and her scores.
I could go on and on about all the cool things for sale and the interesting people who make them. Folks like bike lover and illustrator Spencer Hawkes of Nomad Patches. He started out making patches to commemorate a family bike tour. He made a few extras and friends loved them, so he made more and now it’s his business. Or Richelle Sandoval, whose UpTassels business also started by accident when she co-hosted a big party and decorated with a bunch of mylar (that shiny, plasticky stuff used in what cheerleaders call “pom-poms”). “After the party, everyone wanted to throw it all away and I just couldn’t bring myself to do that. So I stewed on it and after a few months I settled on these bike tassels that you can put on your handlebars,” Richelle told me. “They bring a lot of joy and people smile at you for no good reason.”
Another thing I love about BikeCraft are the unexpected vendors and surprises. Since that first one in 2005, I would let folks show up with whatever they have (we don’t charge a vendor fee to encourage very small makers to join us). Last night a Bike Happy Hour regular, adventure photographer and off-road cycling advocate Andrew Stringer showed up with a bag full of his latest project: a tongue-in-cheek calendar titled, The Radical Lefts of Portland. Calling it a “dad joke that went too far,” Andrew put together a calendar of his photographs — not about politics or protests — but about “iconic” left-hand corners around town. From the smooth and fast pavement on SW Hewett Boulevard, to narrow singletrack in Powell Butte, the calendar is equal parts funny and inspiring. Andrew calls it, “The perfect gift for your conservative family member.”
Then there was my friend Eric Ivy (who you might know as the Grilled-by-Bike guy), who showed up with meme-inspired stickers all sold to support BikePortland! The one with Bernie Sanders that said, “I am once again asking for a donation to BikePortland,” that he stuck to a tip jar had me rolling with laughter. He even made some Zohran Mamdani-styled Bike Happy Hour stickers. Thanks Eric!!
Mamdani-esque.
BikeCraft would not have happened without the inspiration and organizing of Lady Max. This dynamo behind Flat Tire Creations (whose table full of bikey ornaments and other cool things was mobbed all night!) did all the detailed work behind the scenes that made the event turn out so well. Thanks Max!!! And thanks to our wonderful hosts at Migration Brewing — especially Alex and Tyler who hustled all night with a smile.
It feels obvious that we’d do BikeCraft again next year. Heck, some folks say they’d like to visit a bike-inspired marketplace more often than just once year. We’ll see about that. For now, enjoy the photos and video.
Folks loved Nando’s Chronic Carry lineup.Eric Ivy from Squid Prints made us this banner.Andrew from Bicycles 4 Humanity.Shift Board Member Pamela and a future ride leader.One of Shawn Granton’s Pedalpalooza posters.Richelle from UpTassels.Joe from Bike Loud!A bikey snowman from Max at Flat Tire Creations.
(Photos from Silvan Yang and Robert Volz courtesy Ted Buehler)
— This post was submitted by Ted Buehler.
The forecast is for dark skies and rain on Thursday. Consider brightening up your day by coming to see two slideshows about travel by bicycle. I’m hosting presentations from two local adventurers at 6:00 pm this Thursday (12/18) at Migration Brewing on North Williams Avenue.
The first is Robert Volz, who traveled to Cuba in 2024 to participate in a week-long vintage bicycle ride on backroads of western Cuba. He restored a bike, brought it to Cuba, enjoyed it for a week, then gave it away before returning to Portland. The event he participated in, L’Eroica Cuba, is based on a similar event in Italy. The concept is “riding for joy” – not a competition, just an excuse to go out and ride through beautiful roads. Read Robert’s recap of his here and come meet him in person tomorrow. At the event you can hear what the trip was like, ask questions, and get inspired for upcoming adventures of your own.
Our second presenter will be Silvan Yang, a Portland native who left town for a grand journey on two wheels in November 2022. Silvan headed east to the desert, then south to Mexico, Central America, western South America — then to Ushuaia, Chile, the southernmost city in the world.
Silvan meandered around South America a bit, visiting Brazil and Uruguay. But before returning to Oregon, he flew to South Africa and bicycled north to Ethiopia. Read more about Silvan’s adventures bikepacking from Oregon to Patagonia and come meet him tomorrow night.
These adventurers want to share their experiences with you! Being on the road for years requires a different mindset than riding for a week or a month. And it provides a wholly different level of immersion.
Come brave the rain on your bike, or drive or take the #44 bus to Migration Brewing (3947 N Williams Ave) on Thursday night to hear about bicycling in far flung parts of the world.
This is the first event in a three-part series at Migration’s back patio. They are free and informal. Come and go as you’d like. Enjoy Nicaraguan food from Papa’s Frita Chef Rene. And the beer and other drinks are good too! See the facebook invite page for more details.
PBOT will use $234,000 in local gas tax revenues to build a concrete median, new curb ramps, and add a streetlight to this crossing on SE Division next to Mt. Tabor Park. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
The Portland Bureau of Transportation just announced the upcoming construction of two neighborhood greenway crossings of Southeast Division. Using just over $630,000 from the “Fixing Our Streets” program (Portland’s local gas tax), they plan to upgrade the existing crossing at SE 64th in the South Tabor neighborhood and to build a new crossing at SE 77th in Montavilla.
The crossing at 64th leads directly in the new carfree path into Mt. Tabor that opened in spring 2024. PBOT built the 60s greenway to connect to that path late last year and installed a temporary crossing at this location using plastic curbs and wands. This new project is an example of PBOT going back and “hardening” existing infrastructure with something of higher quality that uses more permanent materials. The plan is to install a concrete median island on the east side of the intersection. The project will also build two new ADA-compliant curb ramps in the southeast corner (that connects to the crossing) and install a new streetlight to improve visibility. In March 2022, 46 year-old Patrick Bishop was hit and killed by a driver (who was later arrested for hit-and-run) just one block east of this intersection.
SE Division at 77th. A new crossing will be built here next year.
At 77th, PBOT wants to improve the safety of the 70s Greenway, a key route that runs parallel to the 82nd Avenue corridor. The plan is to build a concrete median island on the west side of the intersection, build four new ADA ramps and install new pavement markings and signage. There isn’t a new streetlight planned, but PBOT has ordered a lighting assessment to see if more lighting is needed.
On their project website, PBOT says both of these crossings were originally designed by TriMet as part of their Division Transit Project. The original plan was to have bus stops at these intersections, but when those were relocated, TriMet shelved the crossings. PBOT leaned on those initial TriMet designs to construct these crossings.
Both crossings are expected to be built next year.
A sign on SE 136th just before Powell Blvd. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
This article was written by Portlander Robert Pineda, author of the Peek Portland Substack.
When I began a Substack about Portland, I wanted my essays to be all hunky dory. I wanted to use publicly available data to tell positive stories. But life is more complicated than that, isn’t it? How can I talk about data that shows the city’s decreasing traffic deaths—which is objectively a good thing—without also talking about the people behind the statistics, the people whose lives were lost because we aren’t quite there yet with some of these road safety improvements? So, bare with me on this one. My goal is to show you how things are getting better, but first, we have to acknowledge where we’re starting from.
All these deaths happened just a few minutes from my house in Southeast Portland. And those are just some of the ones that made the news. This is a real problem in Portland, and if you think I’m cherry-picking facts or exaggerating, trip out on this: a little over a month ago, three people died in traffic crashes on the same night within just two hours of each other and within just two miles of each other. That’s crazy. A walker, a biker, and a person in a wheelchair. Poof! Gone! In the blink of an eye.
PBOT High Crash Network map
Did you know our city government publishes data on the deadliest and most dangerous roads and intersections in Portland? It’s published as part of the work they do around the High Crash Network and Vision Zero. I’ll say more about those a little later.
This data is important, especially for people who walk, bike, and roll through this city — or if you love someone who does any of those things. Regardless of how you get around town, I want to help you understand where the risks are, who’s to blame, and what’s being done about it. And, if you ever decide to yell at local or state government to do something about these dangerous areas, after you read this, you’ll have data to back you up.
What’s the High Crash Network (HCN)?
The High Crash Network is the Portland Bureau of Transportation’s (PBOT) way of saying, “Here are the places where things are most likely to go wrong for you.”
It’s basically a list of the 20 worst streets for driving, the 20 worst for pedestrians, and the 20 worst for cyclists. And after you account for where these overlap, it adds up to 30 intersections PBOT considers “high crash.”
Before I go any further, I want to talk about the elephant in the room: who is responsible for all these crashes and deaths? The easy answer is the people doing the crashing, right? But the easy answer isn’t always the right one. I’m a firm believer in personal responsibility, but I also acknowledge most of the choices we get to make are from a predetermined list our government has approved. Yes, it’s true that people could be a lot more careful. But, like Tupac’s mom, drivers are just “workin’ with the scraps [they were] given.” And in this case, they were given poorly constructed intersections that, at best, don’t do enough to discourage dangerous driving, and at worst, promote it.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that the government created these intersections, and the government need to fix them. Government decides how streets are built, regulated, and maintained. These intersections are dangerous because they’re poorly designed, neglected, and overburdened. For years, city planning decisions have put cars over people. This data is proof that those decisions have deadly consequences. And this is obvious, but I want to say it anyway: this isn’t just a Portland problem. Nearly every city in the world prioritizes cars over people.
Why does this data focus on intersections?
Because intersections are where 71% of pedestrian crashes happen. Because drivers making left turns forget or ignore crosswalks. Because half of crashes happen in low light, which is a big problem at High Crash Network sites. Because East Portland, where I live with my baby son and superhuman wife, has almost double the pedestrian deaths as the other half of the city. Because communities scoring high on PBOT’s Equity Matrix have three times the pedestrian deaths. And because every pedestrian death is a whole life—beautiful and complicated and unique—just disappearing.
The data
When you stare at this data long enough, you see the patterns, especially if you’ve spent time in different pockets of Portland.
The first thing you notice is how often you see Powell. Every few rows in the data, there it is again, reminding you that this is a state highway pretending to be a neighborhood street. It’s the kind of road where you walk your kid to school and all of a sudden you wonder if people should even be allowed on that road because it feels like you’re in the middle of a race track. The one good thing about Powell is that it’s a great example to use when you’re trying to explain to City Council how dangerous some Portland streets are.
The next two things that jump out are 82nd and 122nd. Those two roads pop up again and again because they’re wide and fast, with long blocks and bad lighting. Plus, it’s no secret that historically the city hasn’t invested as much in the adjacent neighborhoods. That’s a recipe for bad outcomes.
Another thing you’ll notice in the data are the intersections next to freeway ramps. I’m not sure how to resolve that, but drivers coming off or turning onto the freeway are in high gear. It’s like they forget they’re now driving by sidewalks, bus stops, and human beings. Is it their fault? Yes, but the design doesn’t help. It makes fast turns and last second lane changes too easy.
And underneath all of this, the bigger theme is that East Portlanders are more likely to die in traffic than West Portlanders. About 90 percent of traffic deaths across the city happened in Districts 1, 2, and 3. (Thanks to BikePortland for publishing crash locations and their corresponding City Council districts.)
With 36 of 41 traffic deaths happening in East Portland, it seems to me this isn’t about individual choices or bad drivers, it’s about infrastructure, policy decisions, and decades of knowing exactly where the danger is but not doing anything about it. The data makes that pretty damn clear. East Portland doesn’t have as many safe crossings or sidewalks, the walks to transit are longer, and the streets are dimmer.
Good-ish news
The good news is that traffic deaths are actually going down. The city is on track to have its fewest traffic deaths in a year since before COVID, with 44 this year, 58 last year, and 69 the year before that. Still, every single traffic death is one too many.
While traffic deaths go down overall, if you dig into the data a little, you see drivers are dying less, cyclist deaths are about the same, and pedestrians now make up half of all traffic deaths. That means the people with the least physical protection are the ones most likely to be mowed down in the streets.
What is our local government doing about it?
PBOT’s Vision Zero program is:
Breaking ground on High Crash Network fixes every year
Adding lighting, especially in underinvested areas
Tightening left-turn movements
Rolling out “No Turn on Red” pilots
Redesigning traffic signals to reduce pedestrian risk
Fixing crossing gaps across the city
Prioritizing fixes in high-equity-need areas
Will these efforts reduce traffic deaths to zero? I don’t think so, but I guarantee you they will save lives. I think they’ve already begun to save lives. And with more strategic planning and financial investment, I believe it’s possible to get this number into the single digits.
Four ways you can use this data
Plan safer routes – I’m not telling you to avoid certain neighborhoods, but I am telling you to avoid certain streets, especially if you’re walking, biking, or using a wheelchair. A little planning could save you from an accident or even death. If you know what streets are the most likely to ruin your day (or your life), why use them? Especially during morning and evening work commutes and school dropoff and pickup hours.
Support road maintenance and infrastructure projects even though they slow you down – I’m guilty of this, so please know I’m not saying this from my high horse like I’m perfect and you’re not: drive slow in construction zones and be patient when traffic backs up due to a public works project. Don’t get all crazy and try to pass people by going into the oncoming traffic lane. I’ve done it. I’ve seen others do it. But we can do better.
Push the mayor, your City Councilors, and PBOT to keep the heat on Powell, 82nd, and 122nd – People are dying on these streets, and they’re dying mostly preventable deaths. That’s unacceptable. Show up at a City Council meeting to tell them you want speed reductions, more lighting, and safer crossings. You should also ask for better public transit in these areas. If you can’t show up in person or virtually to a City Council meeting, email Mayor Wilson, your City Councilors, and PBOT. They all have staff whose job it is to listen to community member concerns. If you don’t know who to reach out to or how to get ahold of any of them, ask me and I’ll point you in the right direction.
Share this data with your people – Knowledge is a small but real kind of protection. The information in this article might be obvious to some of you, but people are busy and caught up in their own lives. It’s possible that people you love dearly haven’t had the chance to stop and think about the fact they take a dangerous route to work or school or lunch every day. If you share this with them and they switch to a different route, you are directly lowering the chances they get in an accident or worse. That’s love.
If you work or play in Portland, or just visit, or love someone who does those things here, then this data is for you. It’s not sexy, it’s not fun, but it can save lives. Maybe even yours.
District 4 City Councilor Olivia Clark. (Photos: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
For Portland City Councilor Olivia Clark, it’s all about the potholes.
Today, Clark will become the latest Portland politician to put their face on an effort to boost transportation spending when the City Council Transportation and Infrastructure Committee discusses the Alternative Transportation Funding Report for the first time. With roads in disrepair and a bleak city budget, Clark is doing this not because the timing is right, but because she feels there is no other choice.
“I am nervous,” Clark shared in an interview with me in City Hall last week. “It’s not a great environment for talking about money at all. I’m nervous about asking for anything… Is this the right time? I don’t know. But we, we just have to have this conversation.”
One of Clark’s first moves as Chair of the T & I Committee was to order the Portland Bureau of Transportation to create a report on new ways to raise revenue. The result is a 42-page conversation starter that lays out the case about the need for more funding and puts forward four recommendations for where to find it.
The top four recommendations in the report are: a transportation utility fee, a street damage restoration fee, a retail delivery fee and a third-party food delivery fee (see more about each of them below). The report includes a detailed breakdown on the pros and cons of each of those approaches, along with insights on 20 other fees that could be part of the mix.
Clark ordered this report with the expectation that the legislature would pass an adequate funding package. What ended up making it through a brutal legislative process was what Clark called a “humble little package.” And now even that package is going to be referred and voters will be able to choose whether or not they want to pay more for transportation. “I’ll just be honest with you, it’ll go down,” Clark shared with me on Thursday. “So it was sort of prescient that we now have this report.”
“Is this the right time? I don’t know. But we… we just have to have this conversation.”
— Olivia Clark
Clark, who brings over two decades of executive-level experience at TriMet to the table, believes doing nothing is not an option and she understands that PBOT is in dire straits as their entire funding model has been turned upside-down. With the Trump Administration playing politics and the Oregon Legislature incapable of securing even a modest funding package, she understands that no one is coming to PBOT’s rescue. “We’re not getting any help from the federal government,” she said. “And we have so many other crises — but if we don’t do something about the potholes and the streets, it’s going to cost us so much more in the future.”
Below is a brief description (taken from the report) of the four funding mechanisms that show the most promise via PBOT’s initial analysis:
Cover of the report
Transportation utility fee:
Who pays: Utility billpayers
A Transportation Utility Fee (sometimes called a “TUF” or “Street Fee”) is a fee for maintenance and improvement of the transportation system paid for by a broad base of users, typically collected using existing public utility billing systems. This broad collection base allows for substantial revenue generation at relatively low cost for rate payers. Implementation is low-cost because of the ability to use existing billing systems and leverage existing low-income discount programs. Fees are not tied to fossil fuel consumption or driving single-occupancy vehicles and thus do not create cross-incentives for City revenue and policy goals. The premise of the Transportation Utility Fee is that the transportation system is a utility, like the electric or water system, that benefits everybody and should be supported to some extent by everybody; even a person who never leaves their residence benefits from the goods and services that travel on the transportation system. A Transportation Utility Fee provides stable, robust support for the transportation system that does not shift with user behavior changes. This fee can be partially connected to system use through trip generation by use. For example, rates for single family and multi-family residences, and businesses can be calculated based on estimated trips generated by property type for residential properties, and property type and size for non-residential properties.
Street damage restoration fee:
Who pays: Utilities that cut into the public streets
Transportation maintenance experts have identified that when streets are cut open for utility work, the “trenching” damages the integrity of the street and accelerates deterioration. Cutting into a street, even when the cut is patched, can shorten its life by up to 65%, meaning the city needs to repair it about 10 years sooner than expected. A Street Damage Restoration Fee (SDRF) can ensure that when utilities cut into streets to reach water, sewer, gas, or telecom lines, they share in the cost of the wear and tear that work creates. The existence of this fee also incentivizes utilities to better coordinate cuts with scheduled street work in order to avoid duplicative work, minimize disruption to the transportation system, and avoid incurring the fees. Portland already charges a fee in the Utility Street Opening permit process, but it is intended to pay for staff time to process the permit, not to address the future maintenance costs resulting from the cut.
Third-party food delivery fee:
Who pays: Consumers who use third party food delivery apps
The growth of third-party app-based food delivery has dramatically increased vehicle trips on city streets, particularly in high-demand commercial and residential districts. These services generate thousands of short, high-frequency trips every day, contributing to congestion, double-parking, emissions, curbside conflicts, wear and tear on roads. A small per-order fee on prepared food deliveries would generate meaningful new revenue and
Retail delivery fee:
Who pays: Consumers receiving retail goods delivered to Portland addresses
As e-commerce and home delivery have grown, so too have the number of delivery trucks and vans traveling on Portland’s streets each day. These trips contribute to congestion, emissions, and street wear, while placing increasing demands on curb space. Several cities are exploring potential delivery fees, but no city has yet implemented them. Two states – Colorado and Minnesota – have implemented fees on delivery of retail purchases. A Retail Delivery Fee would ensure that customers who choose delivery share in the cost of maintaining and improving the transportation system that supports these services. The fee would apply to most retail goods delivered to a Portland address. A small, pertransaction amount would appear at point of sale and be remitted to the City by qualified retailers. Exemptions could also be considered for specific goods and to reduce administrative burdens of collection for businesses below certain revenue thresholds. Revenue from a Retail Delivery Fee could support a broad array of investments that address the growing impacts of delivery and e-commerce activity. Stakeholder engagement with residents and businesses will be critical to understanding the opportunities and challenges of this fee.
PBOT staff say today’s T & I committee meeting is just the first of many steps. From here, there will be public open houses and surveys and a lot more conversations.
I asked Councilor Clark how she’d react to Portlanders who reject the idea of more new fees and taxes outright. How would she convince them to get on board? “All I can do is show them the numbers and show them the facts,” she said. “And if you don’t want to believe it, fine, live with the potholes.”
Clark kept coming back to potholes throughout our interview. When a PBOT staffer who sat in said new taxes and fees are necessary to “stabilize revenue,” Clark injercted: “That’s not what it is for me. What it is for me is filling the potholes, you know, and fixing the streets… I start with damn potholes. It’s killing me.” When I pressed her on how she’d respond to a person who opposes paying more, she said. “I would say, personally, I’m sick of potholes. How about you? I mean, are you tired of this? Are you tired of having to get your car realigned, or you’re falling on your nose on your bike when you go into a pothole? It’s not safe.”
In 2008 former Portland Mayor Sam Adams attempted to pass a street fee that crashed-and-burned when public sentiment turned and gas station lobbyists rose up. In 2014 Councilor Steve Novick infamously attempted again, only to blame his eventual election loss on the effort. Portland has been more successful since 2016 when the first of three local gas tax measures were passed by voters by comfortable margins. Clark will hope those recent successes carry this new initiative forward.
And unlike Novick (who has since won re-election to council and will undoubtedly have some interesting perspectives on this latest revenue attempt), who has said it was worth losing votes to push the idea of funding forward, Clark made it clear to me that she will drop this effort it proves unpopular.
“If there’s not public support, I’m not going to do anything that the public doesn’t want to do. I’m going to scream about potholes until I’m blue in the face. But if the support to do this isn’t there, then I’m not going to, you know, commit Harakiri.”
“My whole message when getting elected was that I want this form of government to work. That’s why I’m here… This is what the public expects us to do is to take care of what we have, take care of the streets. And if they don’t make the connection, then so be it. You know, I’m not going to push where there’s no support.”
Welcome to the week. We are just three days away from the return of BikeCraft. It’s 3:00 to 8:00 pm on Wednesday, December 17th at Migration Brewing on N Williams Ave. I hope you can make it, and I hope you’ve told all your friends to come too. Our vendors have been working hard to offer lots of wonderful things. See you there!
And now for the weekly roundup of the most notable stories from around the web in the past seven days…
Traffic violence: A man (a noted musician) was walking his dog when he was hit and killed by a woman who has had over 100 previous arrests — 82 court warrants and 40 traffic citations. (CBS News)
Tariff trouble: Ex-Portlander Gabe Tiller figured he’d pay $300-$400 in fees to get his new MTB frame from a European brand. But the fee was over $4,000 and now he’s stuck in UPS/USA tariff policy hell. (Singletracks)
Hit and run organizing: There’s a new nonprofit whose mission is to raise awareness of, and battle the scourge of, hit-and-runs. They also have a fantastic name: Fighting HARD (Hit and Run Driving). I learned about them via Streetsblog. (FightingHard.org)
Price of admission: There’s an interesting conversation about whether or not there should be an admission fee to line the roads to cheer riders on major races like the Tour De France. (NY Times)
Overreach: This is what can happen if you let e-bike narratives and anti-bike discrimination run amok: A bill in New Jersey would require all e-bikes to be licensed and registered. (NJ.com)
Playing politics with roads: A Republican-led effort to defund ODOT took a major step forward when organizers turned in over 200,000 signatures to the Secretary of State. (Oregon Capitol Chronicle)
History lesson: Sit back and enjoy this tale of what cycling was like in and around the Montavilla area over 120 years ago! (Montavilla News)
Tale as old as time: Nearly half of the members of the board that oversees transit in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area don’t even use the service. (Star Tribune)
Carfree research: Surprising results from a nationwide survey presented in published research reveals that way more Americans than you probably thought — nearly one fifth! — are interested in living carfree and an additional 40% are open to the idea (Human Transit)
TriMet Board Member Tyler Frisbee speaking at Wednesday’s Trimet board meeting.
UPDATE, 12:30 on Sunday 12/14: Sorry for such a brief post folks. It was end of a long week and I barely finished this video before I had to quit and get to my son’s basketball game. I posted it in the car on the way to his game! Anyways, Judging from comments a lot of you figured out what it was about.
Quick context: Tyler Frisbee (longtime former policy advisory to U.S. Congressman Earl Blumenauer, former Deputy Direcrtor of Government Affairs and Policy Development at Metro, now Director of the Institute of Metropolitan Studies at PSU) weighed in on the 82nd Ave Transit Project at the TriMet Board Meeting on 12/10.
Below are her comments (which I’ve edited for brevity):
“We actually have two very different visions of 82nd that are finally clashing with each other in this moment. We literally had someone get up and say, ’82nd is a highway, stop treating it like it’s a neighborhood.’ And then we had people get up and say, ’82nd is my neighborhood. We’ve been asking for it to be a neighborhood street and serve the neighborhood for 30 years.’ That, to me, is the question, right? This is the moment: is 82nd a highway? Or is it a community? Is it a street that serves the community that it’s in?
And it is correct that it was built as a highway over 100 years ago. It is an incredibly different landscape and neighborhood than it was when it was built. And I would argue that the decision has actually already been made. It is no longer a highway. That [decision] was made with the transfer of 82nd to the City of Portland, and it was made when we started this project, right? You don’t run frequent service down a highway. If that is what we intend that road to be, then we shouldn’t be building sidewalks on it. We shouldn’t be building bus improvements on it. But in response to what we heard from the community, they’ve been organizing for that to be a different kind of street.
I understand people’s attachment to the way a road was built over 100 years ago, but I think there has been really clear discussion that that community looks really different now, particularly in the last 30 to 40 years, it has changed dramatically. And there have been a series of decisions that say we need to change the road to reflect the community and the landscape that it’s in now. And to me, the most ambitious transit project on our busiest bus line in the entire region that will only grow, right? That is a part of our city that is only growing, and more people are moving there, and we are seeing more transit need along that space. That is a very clear answer about where that community is going and what that community needs from us in the future. That does not disregard the fact that change is hard, and that does not disregard the fact that there are folks who have built up entire approaches to their business based on the way that street was.
But we are building a project that’s not meeting the next five years of need. We’re building a project that needs to meet the next 20,30, 40,50, years of need.
Big picture, I think that’s where we are. And you know, Michael [Kiser, TriMet Interim Director of Major Projects], I’ve heard you talk about being a community builder and a city builder — that is what this project needs to do. And some extent, actually, the community is built, right? They went ahead and built without the transportation service, without the transit service, and we’re just trying to catch up. [Bless you, baby. Good job (to her baby with her on the dais!)] This is where things get interesting, right? And it is where you can say, ‘You know, yes, I hear you have a concern around the Left turn lanes here. Here are different ways we can mitigate that. Let’s look at some of these options. Is it going to be perfect? No? Is your clientele going to change? Right?’ Each of those stores has an individual proportion in terms of who gets there by bus, who gets there walking, and who gets there by driving. That is going to change after this project, but our goal is that we are bringing enough new ridership there by the bus, and you know, PBOT is working to make it possible by foot, that they are actually seeing more folks visiting.
And that is my sort of second big picture comment. I have heard a lot from folks asking for we want more data on business impact. And my response has been, ‘You know what? When we look at BAT [Business Access & Transit] implementation across the country, much less internationally, it shows almost uniformly an increase in foot traffic and in support for the businesses that rely and depend on that foot traffic, and frankly, even businesses that are that think of themselves as car dependent, actually often see a much more significant increase in their foot traffic and folks coming off the bus that ends up being more than making up for any potential car loss.
What I have had said to me is, ‘Well, we don’t believe that,’ basically, or ‘It’s different here,’ and it is hard for me to then get to the next stage of a conversation, because it’s like, well, what are we going to turn around for you, that you’re going to believe if your answer is always just that data doesn’t meet my needs, that data is not what I want. When we look at the best data we have across the country, real life, BAT implementation and its impact on businesses, to me, it is very heartening. And what it says it’s a story of resiliency. It’s a story of these projects. They change the way that folks get there, but overall they’re bringing more folks to the door of your business.
So I guess I’m using this as a little bit of a soapbox to kind of push back, because I don’t know how to keep having the conversation of just like, ‘I don’t believe that.’ And I think the question that we have that we want to work with folks on is, ‘How can we help make this work so that it’s not about preserving the way that people get to you right now. It is about what does this look like in the future?’ What do your next 10, 20, 30 years as a business look like around 82nd because let me tell you, that community is changing, and you’re going to have folks getting there differently no matter what. And frankly, sometimes just having the same conversation six different times doesn’t actually change the conversation.
And so I would encourage us to think about how we can have the important conversations and the effective conversations with people that understand their needs and try to help find a good path forward. If they don’t want to participate in that, having that conversation six times is not useful, and so I want to find a way to work with all of our folks, with all the community folks who live along there and make sure everyone’s voice is heard, to find a way to meet needs and address needs when we can and acknowledge that this community has changed and is changing, and we need to meet that.”
