Tucson bike advocacy
Back from my trip, I discovered that my readers took over my blog while I was away, particularly in the comments section of the post below on bike boulevards. Tom Thivener wrote a comment regarding something I often hear from local cyclists:
Tucson is probably the only community rated Silver or higher by the League of American Bicyclists that does not have an active bike advocacy organization. How can Tucson become a more liveable community where the bike is seen as a valid mobility tool instead of just as a recreational tool, if no one is working on building consensus on what that vision is? We have some super active individuals in this community who serve on numerous boards and committees, and who volunteer their time encouraging folks to ride, or teach folks how to be more confident riders. But we don’t have a group who has the time to work the many hours needed to define or implement such a vision for better bicycling in Tucson. This is a real weak spot that the League of American Bicyclists have pointed out. Until a group mobilizes and defines their vision, the leadership of this community will continue to focus on other issues.
I have thought about this a lot. I think the problem is that, first, we really do have a lot of people who are doing great work around here. We have Mike M over at tucsonvelo.com, we have BICAS, the BAC, Jean Gorman, the El Tour folks, active involvement by many local bike shops and riding clubs, and then we have folks in the City who are accessible, thoughtful, and hard-working.
Independent advocacy groups tend to flourish where there is a demonstrable bureaucratic vacuum in local government, where some kind of injustice or neglect is undeniably occurring. But here in Tucson’s governmental infrastructure we have people like Tom Thivener, Ann Chanecka, Jennifer Donofrio, Matt Zoll, and lots of others who are quite obviously doing their level best to implement the vision Thivener is talking about. Their very presence (and competence) is one reason we don’t have an independent advocacy group!
But this isn’t to say one wouldn’t help. Such organizations give cover to local bureaucrats who are hoping to make changes but cannot show their superiors that the changes are justified. The problem is, a community has to really want such a group in order for one to form. It doesn’t seem as if Tucson is there yet, and part of the problem is that when Tucson cyclists call up City Hall, one of the people I’ve named above answers the phone, and actually listens.
The one area where this isn’t true, of course, is with law enforcement. I predict that if anything finally mobilizes Tucson bike advocates, it is going to be a failure of law enforcement. Probably a tragic one.
–Erik Ryberg
August 4th, 2010 at 9:35 am
There have been and are in the
BAC individuals who have been
’super-advisors’…..they possess
the skill to be persuasive in the
right areas to be effective. Most,
if not all, are riders who have seen
the needs and acted on them. The
BAC supports their ideas (advises)
while they ‘work the system’ (advocate).
What Tucson has in the way of bicycle
amenities is considered pretty good
by people other than Tucsonans, so I
guess the method has worked pretty well.
I wouldn’t particularly care to see
another level of bureaucracy added
to muddy this system up. I would
like to see more people involved in
the existing one to get their needs
as they see them out there and acted on.
And it seems the best way to be
enlightened of those needs is to get
out there and ride.
August 4th, 2010 at 10:36 am
We’ve had this conversation on Tucsonvelo before, but, I think that there is room for both the BAC and another independent advocacy group. It’s correct that there are people we can call up that can listen, and it’s good that there is a committee that has clout closer to the top, but if we were to have a growing group of organized citizens that could voice their needs and concerns to government entities, I think that would show there are a lot of people that really care about where the city goes with its transportation plans etc…
I could think of potential situations where an independent group would be important to campaigning for certain things in ways that the BAC could not. I could also see a group like this improving the input and activity of the BAC as well. I can definitely understand the frustration of people not using the BAC or feeling that it lacks involvement, but I believe that a way to improve advocacy here would be through an independent group which would improve the BAC in turn…
I don’t think of it as another level of bureaucracy, but an added voice, or maybe microphone, that could give cyclists clout within the city. A group like this could only work if it was Different people involved. There wouldn’t be a point if half of the new advocacy group was made up of the same people who have been at the BAC meetings over the last 5 years… This is what we want in theory, right? More cyclists voicing their opinion and concern.
To me, Tucson has this dry sleepy desert culture sometimes that really boarders on laziness (and you can’t exclude me from the statement). Whether things are good or bad we take it in slow stride and figure it’ll all work out. Then the few who are working hard at achieving changes get burnt out or out of touch.
August 4th, 2010 at 12:52 pm
I am unaware of different things
related to cycling that could be better
advocated for by a different group
than the BAC. Who will attend another
group’s meetings to express ideas
when BAC subcommittee meetings are
so sparsely attended?
Why not expand and get new faces to
work within the existing framework?
Can someone provide specifics as to
why the BAC sucks?
August 4th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
This whole obsession over obtaining Gold or Platinum status is stupid. If Tucson were given that rating tommorow, whould our streets be any safer? Would less cyclists get run over? Would potholes disappear? Would more people ride? And why should I care about this, it dosen’t matter. We have City/County government that is pro cycling, that’s what matters!
August 4th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
The number of new faces over the
past five years comprises a great
majority of the BAC. There just
needs to be more. The members
for the most part are involved in
other community organizations that
supplement bicycling interests.
It can be a slow and ponderous
group and some on-going projects
might seem dead to the uninvolved
public, but the BAC provides the
continual push and prodding required
to keep bicycle projects from
fading out in the sleepy culture.
I hate to think the degree of tragedy
it would take to motivate an additional
group into action. The past 2-3 years
have seen several severe incidences
with no response.
August 6th, 2010 at 9:25 am
Kenneth, all the concerns you are citing are evidence that a city/government that is not pro cycling. Erik’s continual reporting on the gold/platinum status is to address the concerns before the city pats itself on the back.
August 9th, 2010 at 10:02 am
There is another advocacy group in town that hasn’t been mentioned, and it’s worth checking out. It’s a non-government group, therefore not bound by public meeting regulations which tends to slow things waaaay down. And it can do more than just “advise” – this group can “do” things faster.
The Greater Arizona Bicycling Association (GABA), has an Advocacy group. They have regular monthly meetings – coincidently it’s tonight and every 2nd Monday of the month. Check out http://www.bikegaba.org for more info.