from Issues with City Paper’s “Bike Issue”
from Bike Baltimore by Nate Evans
3. The “outcry” from cycling advocates was definitely not widespread. A few letters to editors, blog posts or emails to me does not constitute bike advocacy. “Complaining because you care” also does not constitute advocacy. Seeking an audience with decision makers to express concerns and offer assistance in creating a safer environment is advocacy.
But …
from Basics of Bicycle Advocacy
Build constituency—It is important to generate a network of individuals who share your goals. Politicians react to constituent interests. If you generate a network of people who lend support to your goals, you will be much more successful than acting as an individual, no matter how worthy your project may be.
And on letters to the editor, there is no doubt in my mind that Jeffery Marks and Michael Dresser have done more to educate motorists and create a safer cycling environment then anything the City has done to date. Education and outreach to those who need it most is bicycle advocacy!
It seems rather ironic that Nate seems to be critical of the very tools and mythology that established his job in the first place. But don’t get me wrong Nate is a wonderful guy and no doubt he was very instrumental in a favorable outcome as was the Mayor’s Bicycle Advisory Committee and Mary Pat Clarke. And maybe we could have sat on our hands and let them carry the ball… maybe… but what if the early statement “the investigation of the accident concluded that the cyclist was at fault because he rode into the car.” really stuck like it did for Alice Swanson in DC… But I don’t think that is the real issue Nate is trying to get at.
I’m going to stick my neck out a bit and read between the lines, Nate seems a bit over justifying police statements as misquotes or more to the point the police are finally starting to work with us and just in the nick of time I might add, just a month or two before Nathan’s crash. So we finally have something good going and it will probably not do us any good to dig up “old” issues. Fair enough but still Nate’s definition of what’s not bicycle advocacy needs work but I will agree what he does define as bicycle advocacy is very desirable.
I should also note that the City Paper was over critical on the City’s approach to establishing bike lanes. The way Baltimore is doing it is the most economical way to do it, seriously do people have a problem with that?
My only complaint is on one way streets have the bike lanes on the left side of the street. No stupid buses to play leap frog with, lower risk door zone, drivers know were the left side of their honk’n big SUV is a lot better then the right side.
Nate goes into more detail in “Where the Bike Lane Ends” https://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BikeBaltimore/~3/PjMgpguk-yk/ oldId.20110426220310347
outcry is part of advocacy and demanding our public employees do their job properly and treat citizens equally under the law is part of advocacy. As you point out, only crying out is missing opportunities, but not crying out perpetuates the status quo. Nate, I love you, but we cant all drop everything we are doing everytime a city employee is about to make a decision that impacts our ability to use the public right-of-way. That is why we pay you (and we should have 12 of you), that is why we call our elected officials WHEN WE CAN and demand that they instruct the cities employees to make the right of ways useable, thats why we call 311, thats why the MBPAC was formed, thats why we join groups like LAB and OLC/Bike MD. I agree we can and should do more, but not crying out was unconscionable. And no the BCPD wasnt misquoted, I was told the exact same thing re: Kranspooler by no less than 3 different officers, including the K Brown quoted in the article. I understand misquotes happen, and its good to give BCPD the benefit when info is lacking, but info isnt lacking, and the behavior of our supposed liason ("loaning" an unregisterd handgun to a politically connected businessman for 20 years) is not exactly making me want to extend any more benefits of doubt.
Very well said, thanks.