Active Transportation Alliance detractors and supporters- be heard

I've seen disparaging comments about ATA but never any elaboration, just name calling. I'm just curious to know why they're being knocked.

I also didn't see much buzz if any at these forums for Bike the Drive. Instead, again, just dismissive comments. I'd like to have an informed opinion here: are people just blowing smoke or is there fire there somewhere?

Views: 2535

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on June 7, 2015 at 2:40am

Well said!

Permalink Reply by yaj 7.4 on May 31, 2015 at 11:15am

Count me as a strong supporter of Active Trans.  I work in the nonprofit arena and used to work at an advocacy organization.  It is increasingly difficult to fund nonprofits, especially policy and advocacy groups.  I know of at least three nonprofits that have gone under in 2015; it’s really, really rough out there!  Earned income strategies are a very common funding diversification method.  And Active Trans has a unique expertise, so I’m glad they’ve found a way to profit from it.  While a split between advocacy and consultancy would eliminate conflicts, it would also eliminate funding for advocacy and thus eliminate advocacy. 

I do remember attending at least one meeting when they sought input about their name change. They were talking with members about it.   I don’t mind the broader focus because the new breadth in focus matches my own.  I gave up my car in 2005 and I use all alternate forms of transportation.  As a cyclist, I have lots in common with folks who support better pedestrian and public transportation infrastructure.  But I understand how it was perceived by some as diluting the cycling mission.

I do think some folks expect Active Trans to do too much.  No single organization can be all things to all cyclists.  We often disagree with each other about the basics (helmets, Idaho stops - even on this thread).  They have a participatory planning process and a Board of Directors.  One can get involved with either or both to influence the focus of their work to some extent.  I’ve been cycling in Chicago for nearly 30 years and I have seen so many things change and improve.  I know that Active Trans is responsible for many of those changes.  (Plus, we’re fortunate to have other cycling advocates like West Town, LIB, etc). 

I am sorry to hear that folks have experienced weak customer service, especially on their crash survivor hotline.  That’s a serious problem that I hope they willaddress.  

To answer the originally posted question - I think it's smoke, but other folks clearly think its fire.  In part, we're all correct.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on June 7, 2015 at 2:46am

The consulting work does a lot to bring us better infrastructure.

There's a fine line between being as confrontational and critical as many folks might want and pushing just enough to keep making progress. Pushing too hard without showing some appreciation tends to be counterproductive.

Speaking out as individuals to supplement the voice of Active Trans allows us the freedom to push harder if we wish, and to add more emphasis to what's been requested.

Permalink Reply by Active Transportation Alliance on June 5, 2015 at 6:01am

Intriguing issues raised here, reflecting perhaps some differing opinions but also some misunderstandings.

A common criticism of advocacy groups of all stripes is that they aren’t confrontational/critical enough of governments they want to influence; that if the advocacy group were louder and more critical, the results will be better. Sometimes that’s true, but often it’s not. 

Active Trans publicly went after IDOT on protected bike lanes and critics of photo enforcement when doing so was needed to get results. And we engage other people – businesses, community groups, individuals, etc – to be the public critic when their voice will resonate better than “Active Trans.” But we’re just as likely to work in partnership with a suburb or an alderman when that offers the best hope for success, even if we aren’t happy with their current approach.

With that in mind, yes we do contract work and it has been one of our most successful strategies over the past decade or so. When an advocacy group is asked to help write a bike plan or develop a Safe Routes to School safety strategy, that is success! 

The plans are so much stronger because we contributed, and that they pay us to bring our advocacy perspective makes it all the more sweet and enables us to be all over the region. We’ve left our mark on plans in more than 100 suburbs, and the relationships we develop help us follow through to ensure the plans are implemented. 

We’ll gladly criticize these towns publicly when that is needed – our mission objectives take priority over any contract. But the towns, school districts, etc. that invite us in tend to be moving in a good direction.

Idaho Stop Law: We support the idea, but strategically it is a bad idea to pursue it now. Just ask advocates in Oregon, where legislation to adopt this spawned an angry, large anti-bike backlash that set their efforts back years. Down the road, when Chicago has come to terms with the new normal of many bikes on the street, the timing could be right.

Crash Support Hot Line:  We’re handling more than 100 cases per year, and if one of our trained volunteers failed to return a call, that is an oversight for sure. 

Police enforcement: No donations or grants to Active Trans pay for police enforcement. The enforcement actions are a partnership between CPD and CDOT, and target all modes of travel, not just bikes.

Ron Burke 

Executive Director 

Active Transportatioin Alliance

Permalink Reply by Eli on June 5, 2015 at 7:29am

Idaho Stop Law: We support the idea, but strategically it is a bad idea to pursue it now. Just ask advocates in Oregon, where legislation to adopt this spawned an angry, large anti-bike backlash that set their efforts back years.

If Oregon's bike situation represents a "backlash," I'd love to see a backlash like that in Chicago. The state is friendlier to cyclists by almost any metric. Portland (like Chicago, the largest city in its respective state) has a bicycle mode share that is a multiple of Chicago's. (Moreover, we seem to have a backlash of our own here every time somebody so much as paints a bike lane--appeasement hasn't worked.)

Permalink Reply by Thomas Bruzan on June 5, 2015 at 8:03am

I too am really disappointed to hear that ATA doesnt think it's time for Idaho stop yet.

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on June 5, 2015 at 4:56pm
I'm not disappointed.

In order to be disappointed, one first must have had expectations that were not met in some significant way. When it comes to ATA my expectations are in negative figures. I'm happy when they fall short on their many active goals which I feel are decidely not congruent with my own as a transportation bicyclist.

Aim low, and you won't be disappointed.
Permalink Reply by Allen Wrench on June 7, 2015 at 1:15am

Well, compare Active Trans with New York's Transportation Alternatives, a more assertive group, and you will see why New York has bike lanes protected by concrete, Broadway turned into a mostly-bikeway, and increasing ridership; while Chicago has, what, broken Wiffle bats on the Kinzie bridge. 

For what ATA does it's fine but there could be much more done to encourage normal people to see bicycling as a reasonable way to get where they are going. Streetsblog.org also shows how other groups in other cities pay attention to details -- which street restructuring needs a new bike lane, where there is a pothole, which intersections have unusual levels of injuries -- and keep city planners' focus on bikes. ATA's challenge to Chicago bike commuters to use streets without adequate bicycling infrastructure just isn't enough. Where are those commuters supposed to safely ride? While we are challenging each other in Chicago they are pouring concrete in New York and other cities.

I think many people are in favor of ATA's efforts but they could be much more proactive, and that is where disappointment (wrongly, I think) turns to disparagement.

Permalink Reply by Mike Zumwalt on June 7, 2015 at 5:00pm
Promoting bike safety, fun events, bike lanes, all good stuff...how about getting all the remaining open grate bridges covered so we dont slip and slide everytime it rains.
Permalink Reply by Yaniv on October 8, 2015 at 10:25am

Appears San Francisco is attempting to implement the Idaho Stop rule. 

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/10/should-cyclists-have-to-stop...

Permalink Reply by Tony Adams on October 8, 2015 at 11:04am

This is great and perhaps to get the (vegan) sausage made they have to do it incrementally, but the legislation proposed in SF is only a half-measure at best. The article tells us that "there is no red-light provision in the San Francisco legislation". Even so, it definitely a step in the right direction.

Permalink Reply by Eli on October 8, 2015 at 11:17am

The stop-sign provision seems the far more important provision, especially in a big city. It's very rare that I'm at a red light in Chicago with no opposing traffic.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service