Feb 21 '08 - 954 W, 2 I - Vote Good + 7 :: Bad - 12 LA Bike Plan Update: Let me stand next to your ire
Published February 21, 2008 by C.I.C.L.E.
By David Pulsipher
Last night I attended the Los Angeles Bicycle Master Plan update meeting in West Los Angeles. I heard about the meeting a month ago, and was really looking forward to attending for many reasons. 1. I wanted to gripe about a few trouble spots in the bicycle network – of course. But 2. I really was curious to see how this type of meeting would be orchestrated, and who would attend, what the format would be like, etc.
I thought the meeting was very well put together. Before the powerpoint/Q&A session began, we could peruse large poster boards that highlighted LA’s bicycle mater plan from 2002. There were ample sticky notes for us to leave comments on anything that caught our eye. After meandering through the line of posters, I made my way over to the tables that had maps of Los Angeles and the existing bicycle network. I made sure to comment my feelings about weaknesses in the network, specifically the mislabeling of Ohio as a bike path (it’s a glorified sidewalk), and a gap in the Venice bicycle lane near San Vincente. I really got some frustration out… on the sticky notes on the map. I think I may have even slipped a “hell” in there. I’m not sure.
I got to do all of this before the meeting started. I’d like to also add that they had juice, water, and some really yummy snacks for the attendees.
Despite this, I must say the meeting left me a little disappointed. Not because of how the meeting was conducted, but because of the behavior of some of the attendees. I feel like many of them came to the meeting with a chip on their shoulder. A chip might not even describe it… more like a boulder on their shoulder. One of the first comments the presenter said was that she was looking forward to hearing every one’s comments - and in order to do so we should be succinct and to the point because of time limitations. “Fair” I thought; because I hate to be at meetings where people bloviate for hours on end.
Immediately someone interjects from the crowd “Why don’t you have enough time!?!?”
Then there were people arguing about trifle discrepancies between the year of the bicycle plan available online, and what you could purchase at the city. People were attacking the presenters with a lot of venom, and it completely befuddled me.
The presenters were a mix of people from LADOT Bicycle Planning, and consultants from Alta. Basically… they are OUR (cyclists) advocates to city planning in the city of LA. The whole purpose of the meeting was for them to get OUR input on what we wanted to change. They are on OUR SIDE!
I understand frustration. I understand feeling alienated and disenfranchised in such an auto-centric city. However, I don’t understand attacking people who are on your side of the issue. The bottom line is, everyone at that meeting (presenting, and in attendance) wants LA to be a more bicycle friendly city. It’s not as if they were the Hummer Club of America, or Exxon, Ford… or some other entity that’s pushing for bicycling to move back to the dark ages.
I also understand being frustrated with the political process. It’s difficult when you feel like you have to go through so many channels, only to have your comments “recorded.”
Last night I saw an opportunity for cyclists to come together to give feedback about what we don’t like about cycling in LA - specific suggestions about gaps in the network, areas that are underserved, infrastructure deficiencies and improvements. If we rely on the consultants and city employees to do all of the research, they’ll only capture a limited sampling. But if we corral our collective experience, we give them a greater pool of knowledge and expertise to draw on.
If we are going to succeed, we have to know who to work with, who’s on our side, and who still needs more convincing. Know your audience. Know your enemy. I heard so many people spouting off about how we need more bikes and less cars on the road. Preaching to the choir buddy. Instead of stating the obvious, why not tell us about a specific place where you feel like bicyclists have been neglected. Infighting only exhausts the process and wastes time when real solutions and strategies could be hammered out.
Despite LA being relatively flat, the road to a bike friendly LA has many steep hills. One way we can help biking in LA is to differentiate between the steep hills, and the people who are trying to help make them smaller.
David is a bicycle commuter living in West LA, but originally from Denver. He is also pursuing a masters degree in urban planning from UCLA.
Would you like to contribute to C.I.C.L.E.? Do you a have bike-related article, news story, event, idea, suggestion, etc...? Check out our submissions page.
You bring up a really great point: we need a political strategy for getting bicycling funded and inserted into future plans in the City.
It would be helpful is we could direct our attention, during business hours downtown, at the professionals and the politicians working on transportation and urban planning issues.
Unfortunately, bikes don’t really have a good lobbyist on their side – building connections with other interest groups, building relationships with local politicians, and becoming intimately familiar with the people working on bicycle related matters.
Until we are able to find either a crazy millionaire, or a sponsor of some sort, we’ll have to do our best: show up at meeting X, give them hell, follow up later with blog posts and newspaper articles, repeat.
lesterlute (Email) (URL) - February 21 '08 - 21:00
lester – i agree, we need to work together to build connections. i think that includes working with the people, people like you and i – who ride and love bikes – who also happen to work for the city or are consultants.there is literally no point in “giving them hell” just for strategy’s sake. it’s devisive and discourages discourse. i think time and energy should be used to rally around positive ideas, building on shared values and then working on where we disagree – in a respectful manner.
a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still
david p. (Email) (URL) - February 22 '08 - 00:33
If anywhere, “give them hell” at the City Council meetings. That’s where the actual “decisions” on action items including transportation projects, policies and plans are “decided” upon.piocan9 (Email) - February 22 '08 - 02:50
“there is literally no point in “giving them hell” just for strategy’s sake. it’s devisive and discourages discourse.”I don’t agree with this attitude. If people making decisions about our roadways are afraid of the reaction from a loud portion of the general public – they will cater to that loud group.
“Give ‘em hell” is not a long term strategy to effective change – but it can work if applied frequently. I think the problem is that “giving ‘em hell” tires activists out, and it turns off a lot of supporters – eventually those making decisions know that if they wait you out, you’ll quit with the noise; or they know that the main organizers are all they’ll have to deal with in a few months.
We’ve been able to maintain a certain amount of pressure over the past year – and I’d like to think that it is now having a small effect on local politics and transportation planning.
If we don’t have the resources to truly lobby, making a lot of noise is the only option left to people with regular jobs, and not a lot of free time.
lesterlute (Email) (URL) - February 22 '08 - 09:23
I attended the Central Los Angeles meeting down by USC last weekend, and I agree with most of what you said in your piece David. I was able to bring up some points that I’ve been wanting to have addressed for awhile, and I felt like my comments were considered thoughtfully and given weight. Unfortunately, I noticed the same sort of hostility / weariness from a few of the attendees as well though.As a cyclists in this still un-friendly cycling city, I can understand the jaded frustration. But as the head consultant from Alta (can’t remember her name without my notes!), change is going to come from a large, vocal and POSITIVE cycling community, just as it did in Portland, where she has done most of her work. They weren’t a very bike friendly city 10-15 years ago either.
We shouldn’t be silent, but we should also check our anger more. It’s ok to be righteous and fight the good fight. But angry gripiness is only going to get us so far.
james O. (Email) - February 22 '08 - 12:45
“Despite LA being relatively flat, the road to a bike friendly LA has many steep hills. One way we can help biking in LA is to differentiate between the steep hills, and the people who are trying to help make them smaller.”I like your assesment of the meeting.
“United We Stand. Divided We Fall.”
If the cyclists are busy arguing amongst theselves, in the meantime, the city has been made car friendly and bike free. While cyclists are more worried about who is hip or who is wearing reflective clothing, or who wears lycra or who doesn’t wear lycra, or who is a poser and so on and so forth, the other side wins. It amazes me every time. Cyclists crticize each other like no tomorrow. As a mountain biker racing on the road, I get criticized, as a racer to the transportation community, I am criticized, as a transportation cyclist to the racer community, I am criticized. People are so worried about how to get it done, when actually the IF hasn’t even been decided. I am not asking all cyclists to be friends, and to love one another, but be happy to agree to disagree about how, and come together to create the change, to be the change.
We perhaps need some LEADERS. And by leaders, I mean people who have charisma, don’t react, don’t shoot down the other side, don’t criticize, but come positively with firm convictions… to get the point across, stand tall, speak well and rally the people. We all have complaints, but complaining is not the way- solutions are the way.
A good LEDAER can unite the people and bring about positive social change. A good leader does not whine, complain, or come in with an iron fist. A good leaderwill get the job done.
And I think that a previous post by Rob, about we’re all Bicycle Messengers breathes the same fresh air as this article…
thanks guys.
mtbchick (Email) (URL) - February 22 '08 - 18:03
mtbchick,I find your opening remarks surprising – the bicycling world is such a small subculture that infighting and divise cliques do not play that significant of a role.
The leaders you speak of come from a pooling of ideas, interests, and resources. Right now, cycling need to work on bringing other groups interests and resources together – because we’ve already got some pretty damn good ideas about what our city should look like in the future.
Seriously – money and coalitions count. Whether we are screaming at bureaucrats, or politely slipping small checks into their campaign funds, it is not neccessarily our style, but how we create a political force behind bicycling.
I think that the “give them hell” strategy has actually worked in bicyclists favor thus far. It continues to mobilize riders to get engaged in transportation planning and funding.
Anger is a great motivator, and fear of a small mob DOES affect the decisions that bureaucrats and politicians make. It isn’t pretty, but it can work.
lesterlute (Email) (URL) - February 26 '08 - 19:14
There is a whole spectrum of approaches to influencing policy. Each approach brings something of real value to the political stage. Perhaps we need cyclists throughout the whole spectrum to really make it roll – some of us to aggressively pressure our political leaders, some of us to ride Critical Mass, some of us to teach new riders how to fix a flat, some of us to ride with groceries in our baskets, some of us to win at the Rose Bowl – Hincapie!None of us alone can turn this whole spectrum, but each of us can contribute in our way to making sure that there is a future in cycling for all.
Rob - February 27 '08 - 10:28
Wow, looking back at over two years ago, it’s as if the small fissures back then were already on a path to grow into a cleavage between empowerment through communal positivity and empowerment through anger. where are Rob and mtbchick today? They both sound like they have a lot of charisma, and I would’ve followed them to hell. er….I would’ve followed them and stayed away from the “only giving hell” mentality. what happened to us?Adrian (URL) - April 13 '10 - 13:06