When asking around, I heard these three candidates are some potential good bike-friendly options:
Let's use this thread to discuss, bring in articles, quotations, and proof of bike-savviness. Cool?
I wouldn't call the it "journalistic lobbying" -- it's simply journalism. It's what the Fourth Estate is suppose to do.
MORE fines is NOT the solution for funding shortfalls. I think it's a fundamentally flawed approach.
Argonne, when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
There are over 50,000 miles of streets in Chicago, and less than 250 miles of bike lanes. If I'm a hammer, it's focused on a very small number of nails sticking out. I don't think it's asking too much for the city to a) provide bike lanes, b) keep them clean, and c) enforce the laws on the books, helping to keep improving a) and b).
On a positive note, I saw a city worker this morning shoveling snow by hand out of the bike lane at the corner of Washington and LaSalle. I gave her a thumbs up, and thanked her.
Understood, however if our strategy is that the funding source is based on the scenario where from those article links and our own observations the Uber drivers, Fed-Ex drivers and poor people break the law and periodically block the bike lanes which is also our complain, the adversarial nature of that doesn't seem sustainable either. With tickets at 7% of the city operating budget, which is already at a major shortfall, odds are the incremental ticket revenue is just plowed back into the general fund with no earmark for our lane maintenance.
You also don't want anything earmarked when it comes to bike lane funding. If you set aside any one funding source for any one infrastructure project, there is a tendency to not invest in that project except when funding is available. Look at bridge, viaduct and sidewalk improvements; there are dedicated funds occasionally available for these things, so they are often not covered with general operating funds, either from the city, county or state.
There are about 4400 miles of streets. There used to be a figure that said 5000, but it's definitely about 4400.
Yeah, a little too quick on my part. The Chicagoland area has over 54,000 miles, but only 4000 or so within the city boundaries. There are ~280 miles of bike lanes, or roughly 6%.
I believe it is state law that prevents photo enforcement of tickets.
It would be so much better to have traffic enforcement employees with a GoPro go to known areas of violations (parking in bike lanes, parking in bus stops, failing to yield to pedestrians, etc), spend a few hours recording violations, then go to an office and spend some time uploading the video to a database (to be viewed in traffic court if appealed), and mail out the tickets.
Wouldn't that mean that red light tickets aren't enforceable? All the candidates at last night's forum were looking forward to working with JB on transportation issues, so if that's the problem perhaps we can get it overturned.
That article in the Tribune has some pretty good quotes from Lori Lightfoot. On the other hand, she also likes speeding and driving through red lights.
As for Susana Mendoza, there was that time she, on a bicycle, chased down a guy in a pickup who caused a crash, but she seems too connected to the political machine (Michael Madigan and Ed Burke) for my liking.
Those are my top two choices (for now).
When Amara Eniya came to Rogers Park some weeks ago I asked her how she planned to improve bus service in the city. She shared that for a few years she primarily got around the city on bike. She still bikes for transportation and for recreation. That made me feel more confident voting for her knowing that she's had years of experience biking on the streets of Chicago. She was also able to connect the issue of shitty bus speeds to equity and economic development.
Biking and transit make up such a big part of my daily lived experience that I can't vote for anyone who doesn't get it.