The meeting did not start well.  News came in that a proposed bike lane along a stretch of PCH had been rejected for being “discontinuous”.  An update on the $900K grant from Caltrans to improve the bicycle route between Trancas Canyon Road and the Ventura County line was met with the illogical concern that the improvements would result in more cyclists using the road.  Well, yes, hopefully.  There’s not much point in having a bike route if no-one’s going to use it.

Later in the meeting, the attending cyclists quickly laid to rest the issue of whether those that run red lights should be ticketed – overwhelmingly, the answer was yes.  However, the deeper issue of whether cyclists should be targeted by law enforcement was addressed with results from an examination by the Malibu Times of the approximately 2000 collisions that occurred on PCH between 2004 and 2005  It found that nearly all involved some combination of alcohol consumption, driving at night, making an illegal u-turn, brakes failing, falling asleep at the wheel, or speeding.  There was no mention of cyclists.  The recurring theme to many of the cyclists’ comments was education for all road users, road improvement, and specific training for the Sheriff’s Department (Malibu does not have its own police force) on how to deal with cyclists.

As public comment ended and the commission members began to speak it became apparent just how far Malibu has to go in order to address the needs of cyclists.

PCH is a class III bike route but the high speed of motor vehicles and lack of space make it a dangerous place to ride.

Members of the commission (a commission tasked with making recommendations to the City Council on, amongst other things, traffic safety) appeared ill-informed of cyclists’ rights.  Multiple members of the commission were unaware of a cyclist’s right to take the lane in the event of sub-standard lane width, did not know that riding on the shoulder was voluntary, and that a cyclist cannot be ticketed for riding in the travel lane.  It was, honestly, an immensely frustrating exchange of common misconceptions from several commission members and cyclists’ rights to the roadway from the attending riders.  The representative from the Sheriff’s Department was misleading at best, stating that cyclists must ride as far to the right as possible.  Nope, the law says “practicable”.  It’s possible for me to ride over broken glass but it’s really not practicable.

Furthermore, calls for speed limit reductions and work to clear up landslides that have crept into the shoulder where most cyclists ride (though not because they are obligated to) were met with the refrain “our hands are tied” since Caltrans, a state-level department, is responsible for engineering and setting speed limits, not the city.  However, the PSC has worked with Caltrans before.  Just a few months ago Commissioner Chris Frost rode along with a Caltrans engineer to identify trouble spots along PCH, aided with information from the grass-roots organization “A Safer PCH”.  As a result of that collaborative effort crosswalks will be made more visible, and signs reminding drivers of speed limits will be added.  So it can be done.  It’s time to take collaborating with Caltrans on PCH safety issues out of the “too hard” bin again.

Again and again, the cyclists attempted to inform the commission of their rights, as well as offering up valid solutions to the numerous problems that plague PCH.  However, at least during the meeting, it seemed that the commission was focusing on how to enforce the law for cyclists, rather than how to improve the road conditions.  Making PCH safe for cyclists is no small task.  Sharing the road is difficult when cars move at speeds upwards of 50 mph and the road width is naturally limited by the ocean on one side and cliffs on the other.  But there are many measures that can and must be taken to protect vulnerable road users who have as much right to PCH as motorists.

I will say this for the meeting: it opened lines of communication between Public Safety Commissioners and cyclists who may not have met otherwise.  So I’d like to thank Commissioner Chris Frost for inviting us out there.  We’ve got a long way to go but opening a dialogue between the concerned public and city officials was a start.

I’ve never done a vlog (video blog) before, so I welcome your input.  There’s so many things in a week of bike work that I would love to write about, that I wish I had the time to write about, that I can’t.  So, this is a way to share some of those with you, and also give a personal angle on some of the stories that do get reported.

City planners have been meeting regularly with Santa Monica Spoke to gather our input, and we now have a second City Council member, Terry O’Day, who is championing cycling infrastructure.

Actions like this make you feel like your local government is listening.

Current Santa Monica Bike Map

So where’s the conflict you ask?

In early July 2010, Santa Monica approved the Land Use and Conservation Element plan, in an attempt to make the city cleaner, greener, and improve its residents’ health and quality of life.

Agensys, a pharmaceutical company is on the verge of occupying the 1800 block of Stewart St for 50 years. The lot is adjacent to Bergamot Station, in the exact spot where the Expo Bike Path would end.  Currently, Agensys is dodging the requirement of providing bike access through their property.  The only concession they’ve made is allowing pedestrian walkway – cyclists would have to dismount and walk their bike until they’re off Agensys grounds. The pedestrian walkway would be closed off at night, rendering it useless as a reliable thoroughfare.

On page 35 of the LUCE Chapter 4 – Circulation section, Michigan is designated as a bike route (LUCE Circulation PDF – 14mb).  By approving the LUCE plan, Santa Monica has made a commitment to “minimize, and where possible, eliminate pollution and motor vehicle congestion” (pg 2, Circulation PDF).  If Agensys was to create a bike path through their property, the would extend the Expo Bike Path into Santa Monica by providing a connection to Michigan Ave. This would be a very powerful alternative for cross-town cyclists.

Michigan is already well-known by locals to be a safe route just south of the nasty 10 freeway.  Students use it to get to SaMo High, and riders use it out of sheer necessity – when you have deathly-fast moving Olympic above and hilly Pico below, you’re not left with much of an option.

Proposed LUCE Map - Michigan is highlighted through the Agensys lot

The City Council-approved LUCE plan lists Michigan as a bike route. Also in Ch 4, page 38, there’s a blurb about large property developments or superblocks, which would apply in this case – they have to “provide through access for bicyclists and pedestrians.”

I don’t see how this is even a point of contention. If a company gets a hold of this plot of land, especially if it’s for such a long time, then they have to abide by the city’s rules. The LUCE commitments cannot be skirted. The only issue up for discussion at this point should be how to make it happen. Indeed, this is the first major test of the potency of the LUCE plan.

My job was to state the obvious. To read about the issue in more detail, see what Santa Monica Spoke members have to say. See what Gary has to say in his report. You will also find a link to Barbara and Kent’s original report.

Come speak your mind:

Wed, Sep 1: Planning Commission at City Council chambers
Tue, Sep 14: First Agensys vote at City Council
Tue, Sep 28: Final City Council decision on Agensys

http://bit.ly/LB4Lsurv

Share it on your twitter account, share it on Facebook, and ask your friends, family, and community to take the survey.  This survey will get them thinking about hit and run, driving privileges, and what should come first – life or license?  We have to change the law for 37 million Californians . . . we better get started now!

Life Before License had it’s first organizing meeting last Sunday, the 15th, in Hollywood.  Activists of all stripes came together and we discussed means and plans of attack for addressing hit and run.  The free ranging discussion led to a consensus position – the laws that govern our streets, from top to bottom, must be reformed.  Life Before License, therefore, is our first step on a tough journey of comprehensive reform.

We left with a plan to build a broad coalition of all road users and a commitment to changing hearts and minds.  The first step toward change is understanding the lay of the land.

If you want to go a step further and get involved, we’ll be holding our 2nd Life Before License organizing meeting this Sunday, 8/29:

Life Before License Organizing Meeting
Hollywood Adventist Church - classroom
1711 North Van Ness Avenue
Hollywood, CA 90028

Or contact Bikeside via email at contact@bikesidela.org

You can RSVP via Facebook or Twtvite!

LA Streetsblog Re-launch party this Wednesday, 8/25

Damien Newton, founder of LA Streetsblog, thought he would have to shutter his operation when funds dried up earlier this summer.  A month ago, he announced that LA Streetsblog will live, and resume normal volume of publication this Thursday.

There will be mad prizes, check out Green LA Girl to find out about the goodies! See you there!

Four (UPDATE: LA County Fire Department says three) cyclists were hit this morning on Mulholland at Las Virgenes.  Purportedly three (UPDATE: LA County FD says two) of them are in critical condition in DTLA.  They were hit by an elderly woman turning left.  Check back here for updates as we get more information.  If you have information on this collision or the status of the cyclists, please contact us at contact@BikesideLA.org.

Four cyclists were hit this morning on Mulholland & Las Virgenes, supposedly by a left turner.

UPDATE: Inspector Don Kunitomi of the LA County Fire Department says that it was three cyclists, not four as previously reported.  They confirmed that two cyclists were transported in critical condition.  They could not confirm where to.  The call was made at 7:30 am and response reached the scene – two cars and one helicopter – at 7:40 am.

Best wishes to the injured riders and their families.

UPDATE:  KTLA has an article up now with better info.  The collision occured at Mulholland Highway and Stokes Canyon Road.  The motorist was an 81 year old woman.

Helicopter shot of the scene of the collision

UPDATE, 6:23pm: NBC 4 ran a piece just now which brings in some new details (AT appearance at 1:10!)  I got to ask NBC 4 reporter Ted Chen about what he knew about the cyclists’ conditions.  They’re not life threatening injuries at this point though one has multiple pelvis fractures.

Midnight Ridazz also has a thread.  @Danceralamode found a Facebook page post by Dorothy Twitchell saying:

The cyclists involved are my teammates. While none of their injuries are life threatening (thank god!), they are serious. When we rec’d the initial word they were air lifted to UCLA we feared the worst. They are happy to be alive! One may s…till need surgery and there is a long road of recovery and rehab for them!!

She actually made a left turn in front of them and panicked when she finally did see them… and stopped in their path!!

Please keep them in your thoughts and prayers.

At the recent Los Angeles Bike Summit Mayor Villaraigosa unexpectedly announced that he would push for state-level legislation that would make it mandatory for all cyclists in California, regardless of age, to wear a helmet when riding.  Currently the law in California requires only those aged 17 years and under to wear helmets.  At first glance, it seems like this is a no-brainer.  Adult or child, nobody wants a head-injury, right?  If we all wear helmets then cycling will be safer.  Right?

Actually, despite numerous studies the consequences of enforcing such a law remain unclear.  A review of the effects of helmet laws in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada showed that cyclist safety did not improve any more significantly than pedestrian safety over the same time period, despite an increase in helmet usage.    A 2005 study in California found an 18% reduction in the number of traumatic brain injuries among youths following the change in the helmet law, while a 2006 study in San Diego found no statistically significant decrease in the proportion of head injuries post-legislation compared to pre-legislation.  Over a 15 year period in the US, helmet usage increased from 18% to 50%, yet the rate of cyclists sustaining head injuries increased by 40%.  There are many more studies out there, none has been able to reach a solid conclusion.   Many factors compound the difficulty of assessing helmet law efficacy.  Helmet laws are often announced in tandem with other campaigns (e.g. drink-drive awareness) that can increase cyclist safety, and any study conducted over a period of more than a year or two must account for changes in infra-structure, and cycling trends (e.g. popularity of mountain biking vs. road biking).  The results from these studies can be swung to support both sides of the argument, so I’ll label them as, at best, inconclusive.

Futhermore, requiring cyclists to wear helmets sends the message that cycling is an inherently dangerous activity.  A mandatory helmet law could potentially discourage cycling when Los Angeles, and the US as a whole, desperately needs sustainable transportation.   Pedestrians are as likely to suffer a head injury after a fall as a cyclist yet it is cycling that is labeled as a risky way to travel.    Surveys conducted to assess the impact of helmet laws on the popularity of cycling produce inconsistent results, with US surveys showing no difference between pre-law and post-law cycling rates, while Canadian and Australian surveys showed declines ranging from 5% to 30%.  When the number of cyclists on the road doubles, the likelihood of a motorist hitting a cyclist drops by about 30%.  This “safety in numbers” effect is thought to be responsible for the low rate of cyclist fatalities in countries like Denmark and the Netherlands despite a very small fraction of cyclists wearing helmets (see the chart below for a comparison to the US).

Safety in numbers: More cyclists on the road make cycling safer. The rate of fatalities appears to be independent of helmet usage.

Despite the muddling statistics there is one thing I am sure of: if you ever find your head hurtling towards the ground, something has gone horribly wrong.  There are no such things as ‘accidents’ on our roads.  No cyclist falls without a cause, be it a pothole, a driver passing too closely, or some other hazard.

Cyclists at the summit called for the city to focus on improving road safety, while the Mayor focused on injury prevention.  Amongst other things, cyclists suggested pothole repair, adding a bicycle section to the drivers test, cycling programs for school children, and a 3-feet minimum passing distance law.  Mayor Villaraigosa was not against these ideas, indeed he was in favor of the majority, but kept reiterating his support for a helmet law, effectively placing the burden of responsibility for injury prevention on cyclists, rather than focusing on preventing collisions and incidents in the first place.  An additional concern is that a mandatory helmet law would likely make it difficult, if not impossible, for non-helmeted cyclists to seek damages for injuries that could have been prevented by a helmet, even if responsibility for the incident lies entirely with another party.

Of course, one has to appreciate that it is far easier for the Mayor to force thousands of cyclists to wear helmets than to convince millions of drivers to follow the laws of the road.  The path of least resistance, however, often leads to a less preferable destination.  That foam and plastic helmet Mayor Villaraigosa wants you to wear is not an collision prevention device.  It is a last resort, the final line of defense between your skull and the ground.  Despite the Mayor wearing a helmet on July 17th 2010 he still had to undergo surgery and has had multiple hospital visits for follow-up care since.  Wouldn’t it be better if the taxi driver had been properly educated and the incident never happened in the first place?

Mayor Villaraigosa’s announcement at the summit was largely met with derision.  Despite losing the room each time he stated his intent to push for the law several times.  Boos and jeers followed.  Los Angeles cyclists are not alone in their resistance.  Nationally, 46% of cyclists oppose such a law, with a further 36% not having a strong opinion on the issue.  Just 18% are in favor, suggesting Mayor Villaraigosa will have to work hard to get the level of support needed, all the while spending our tax dollars to do it.

In conclusion, studies to date do not suggest that a helmet law will make cycling safer, and there is evidence that shows enforcing such a law may even be detrimental.  Measures proven to increase road safety include driver education, a minimum safe passing distance law, improving road conditions, and better infrastructure.  It is this cyclist’s hope that Mayor Villaraigosa will direct his time, energy, and political clout towards more effective methods to improve safety on our roads, rather than pursuing a counter-productive measure overwhelmingly opposed by the cyclists he represents.

“Thank You for the Invitation, unfortunately I as well will be at work during these hours.” – Hector S.

” I’d like to go but I’m a working joe and that’s a tough time.” – John V

“Work prevents me from going to this, but give ‘em hell guys!” – John K

” Gotta work. Will be there in spirit.” – John M (lotsa Johns!)

“this is great but for us that work that would love to be there its hard to make it on a monday at 9am when one is at work! Will try and get there but not sure it will work out” – Mitch F

” Sorry But Duty calls and I must work no work no pay but I would be there if I could.” – Sylvia R

” I can’t afford to take a day off from work but we, The Wilmington Community Bike Coalition, support this event.” – Salvador L

” If I didnt have to teach/train all day, I would be there!” – Melissa G

“Can’t take off work that morning, sorry…I hope we get some more advocacy for bike riding in LA!!!” – Johann D

“Some people actually have jobs.” – Vito G

” I would LOVE to attend – but I have to work during those hours! Can there be a skype or other online connection to the meeting?” – Karen H

” Could somebody please note to the Mayor that attendance of relevant bicycle commuters will be significantly restricted by the 9am-11am schedule? This is when a good chunk of the working population start their work day.” – Anthony F

“@Anthony F: I agree with you. I was hoping this would be a Saturday morning thing…I would definitely get my bike going but on a Monday morning…can’t get away from the morning madness at work…” – Maria S

“Such short notice?” – Lydia E

” I will try to make it, i need to see if i can make arrangements with my employer.” – Johnny P

• 6:30pm – 8:30pm Bikeside Speaks! (RSVP on Facebook, Tweet-vite)
• 8:30pm – 11pm “bike-in” screening by the Disposable Film Festival (RSVP on Facebook)
• afterward, party at the Hotel Erwin on Venice Beach

Cynergy Cycles will host the Disposable Film Festival’s bike-in screening in it’s parking lot.  Bring a bike and a blanket and watch quality films from “disposable media” like cell phone cameras or flip cams.  Before that Bikeside Speaks will present cutting edge projects in bike activism – here’s the first part of the lineup:

• Betsy Butler, Democrat for State Assembly
• “Cool Ass” Mike Bower’s project 1000 Bikes – a non-profit project to put bikes in the hands of foster kids and their families.
• Gary Kavanagh of Gary Rides Bikes and Santa Monica Spoke will talk about redefining freedom of mobility beyond the motoring age.  Did Gary just call the end of the motoring age?  I think he did.
• Stephen Box, candidate for City Council District 4 in LA, will inspire and engage . . . and probably put the crowd in stitches as he did last Bikeside Speaks.

There will be an awesome Specialized bike raffle, all proceeds going to Bikeside.  Check back here for updates on the full line-up of speakers!

Look for Bikeside Speaks to head east, way east, in September!)

This flyer was not made by Alex Thompson.

Life Before License gets rolling from 1pm-3pm on Sunday, August 15th in Hollywood

Bikeside will be hosting a meeting (RSVP on Facebook, Twitter) this Sunday, August 15th, from 1pm till 3pm, to get organized for our Life Before License campaign.  The Life Before License campaign is Bikeside’s campaign to change state law so that hit and run drivers have their license revoked; it is part of Bikeside’s larger StreetLife initiative.

This meeting is for anyone who wants to participate and support the campaign.  We’ll talk about strategy, connecting with supporters, and talking points.  We may even do some role playing.  We’ll also start to work out some other areas of responsibility, such as legislative support, graphic design and relating to media.

The meeting is from 1pm to 3pm at the Hollywood Adventist Church in Hollywood.  We’ll be in a classroom, and I’ll post signs to direct you inside.  We’ll have to lock up outside.

Bring your brainz, your pens, and your hit and run stories.

For stories about Hit & Run, check out Bikeside’s Hit & Run category:

http://www.bikesidela.org/category/campaigns/hit-and-run/

“Oh but what about the nice weather, the beach, the movie stars, the abundance of avocados??”.

No.  None of that makes up for the huge inequalities, lack of humanity and compassion, and the bad air quality.

Sure, there’s a cute, livable, walkable bubble here and there, but they’re too far apart to make LA feel like a cohesive city.  As a whole, Los Angeles blows.
First step to creating change is to complain and create a ruckus, let folks know you’re not happy.  That involves, well, a whole lot of complaining.  More cyclists (and Angelenos in general) need to complain, on a regular basis.  Stop going straight home after work to your TV shows, it’s making you lethargic and impassive.

But while you complain as loudly as you  can, you should concurrently try to find out why things aren’t the way they should be.  That’s what I’m hoping to accomplish here.  Why does my daily commute to work feel so unsafe?

Let’s start with one of the most obvious offences.  The reason so many cyclists’ commute through Beverly Hills and the LA Country Club sucks is due to the fact that they have to avoid the few streets that are direct routes through this area.  Sunset, Wilshire and Santa Monica Boulevard.  Further south, we have Olympic and Pico.  Sure, if they’re bold enough, they chance it anyway and deal with the fast moving traffic and bad pavement.  In some lone cases, even a dead-ending bike lane.

Sunset has some decent stretches. But once it starts winding around those blind curves north of the Country Club, you’re using up an extra life riding on a street with no shoulder and no sidewalk to bail out to.

Santa Monica Bl is great throughout West Hollywood, that short-lived bike lane is the best part of my commute.  Slightly better than Wilshire when crossing through Koreatown or Mid-City, but still not a pleasant ride.

Wilshire.  Oh Wilshire.  Potholes the size of craters.  Maybe one day I won’t feel like Don Quixote on a bike, fighting against the rapid buses, and dueling with fast cars with no license plates.  I keep hearing about this bike/bus lane of epic proportions – I’ll believe it when I see it.

Beverly Hills is part of the problem.  I don’t want to be the next Brandon Chau.  We need more enforcement, more accountability – why can’t the police and judicial system be biased in the cyclists’ favor for once?

Whomever is in charge of the Gauntlet on Wilshire is part of the problem.  And we’re not the only ones with a shitty street by that name.  A major part of the problem is the sheer size and placement of the Los Angeles Country Club.  Why is that monstrosity even there?!?  It feels like a slap in the face of riders commuting through there.

Residential streets are not an option – I’ve tried it enough to know that the more you turn off a street and onto another, you increase your chances of getting hit by a nonchalant unattentive motorist.  Therefore, these major thoroughfares must be made safer to ride.

From what I can tell, Los Angeles has been sucking for at least the past 30 years.  All of its major problems still haven’t been dealt with.  Regardless of what cards we’ve been dealt, we can’t let it get any worse.  If you give a damn about this city, you better complain every chance you get.

LA get your standards up!

Partly in response to his bike collision, the Mayor is holding a Bike Summit. While that might not be your cup of tea, it provides an interesting example of the Mayor’s staff failing to engage the community. Just in scheduling the Bike Summit (BS), the Mayor’s staff bypassed the process, bypassed the leadership, and excluded the working public. Word is that the cheese and crackers will bankrupt the city, the handouts will give you paper cuts, and the staff salaries will double the national debt.

It’s too bad too – the Mayor more than anyone has the capability to charm a crowd and be their champion. Instead, it seems more and more that his citizens get fickle attention from staff in need of some solid mentoring.

Staff made three avoidable blunders in scheduling the BS. First, they bypassed the City process, failing to meet with the City’s Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) (which includes four mayoral appointees) about the BS.  Second, they bypassed the community leadership, ignoring community leaders, and leaving them to learn the details of the BS from the press. Finally, they scheduled the BS for Monday morning, from 9 am to 11 am, excluding the working public from participating.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (background, head down)

The BAC is the only official body that addresses cycling exclusively. They meet every 2 months, which is pretty far apart if you’re a mayor who is eager to schedule an event. On the other hand, they happen to be meeting this coming Monday, the 9th. The Mayor’s staff could have easily consulted with the committee on the 9th about their plans for the BS. Instead, staff announced the BS today, missing an opportunity to engage in the City’s process. In doing so, they dinged the BAC’s credibility, reinforcing the common impression that inconvenient process is process best ignored.

While they didn’t meet with the BAC formally, the Mayor’s staff could have consulted with the BAC members individually, and could have contacted prominent organizations and individuals in the cycling community to sound out the idea of a BS. It’s just good sense to engage the leaders of the constituency you’re planning to engage, and make sure they’re on board. Not the Mayor’s staff! Leaders in the cycling community were left to learn about the Mayor’s plans from an article in the LA Weekly. We can’t know why staff bypassed community leadership, but it can’t be accidental – several people reached out to the Mayor.

Worst of all, staff showed a basic disrespect for working people. It’s not easy to keep a job in this city right now, and if you have one, a good way to lose it is to take the morning off. But, if you work 9-5, that’s what you’ll have to do, since the Mayor’s staff scheduled the BS for Monday morning. Neighborhood Council members et al see this often – city staff won’t attend because it’s after working hours. For the cycling community, it’s a reminder that we’re not special, and we get the same second class treatment that other community groups get. A 9 am summit is more a meeting for staff, not a summit for the public.

We need more walk and less talk in this city. We, the cyclists, and we, the citizens. The Mayor has a list of actionable items on his desk that he ought to act on. If he is going to hold a BS, then staff should assure it’s effective, not a waste of two hours of the Mayor’s time and untold tax payer money on staff salaries. Bypassing and insulting community leadership is a waste of time and money. Leaving out the working public is a waste of time and money.

It’s not rocket science to recover from these blunders and an office with as much political talent as the Mayor’s ought to be able to recover with a flourish. Here’s three simple steps:

1) Reschedule the BS for a weekday evening. Cyclists (and interested non-cyclists) who work ought to be able to attend this event.

Pro-tip – tell the public the mayor had to have breakfast at the UN or something and thus needed to reschedule. People will totally buy it and it makes the Mayor look awesome.

2) Engage community leaders. Conferences, summits, and forums are great but they work best in tandem (bike pun!) with smaller meetings with experts and activists where a robust discussion is possible.

Pro-tip – flowers and chocolate are a great way to apologize. Avoid mystery chocolates though.

3) Take part in the process. Send mayoral staff with the ability to respond & act to the BAC. Own the blunders in scheduling the BS, and ask for the committees input on changes to the schedule and agenda.

Pro-tip – complimentary bikes for anyone bringing bolt cutters!

Failure #1: The meeting takes place during work day, making it impossible for many of the city’s best bike advocates to attend.  Had the mayor’s staff consulted with bike advocates ahead of time, it would have realized this.

Failure #2: The mayor’s staff did not coordinate with members of the city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee – the official body focused on bicycle issues in Los Angeles.  Members of this committee learned of the summit secondhand, from press.

Failure #3: The mayor’s staff titled the meeting the Bike Summit, disrespecting advocates who organized two previous bike summits in Los Angeles.  More than 150 people attended each of the two previous bike summits – the Bike Summit in 2009, and the Street Summit (rebranded Bike Summit) in 2010.  The Mayor’s event, early on a working day, can’t compete with the real Bike Summits, so his staff have set him up for a failure.

A summit is a bringing together of the most powerful energies on an issue.  Bikeside endorses the good intentions of the Mayor and welcomes his energy and clout.  We do not endorse the process or timing of this event.  By scheduling the bike meeting during the workday, the Mayor’s staff settled for third place.  The Mayor’s staff sent a clear signal that convenience for city staff will continue to be a higher priority than engaging the community leaders who have been working on bike issues all along.

When the Mayor returned from Copenhagen he said “in the area of bicycling I’ve got to do a better job and the city’s got to do a better job.”  Indeed.  Mr. Mayor, you may begin instructing your staff to move the meeting to a weekday evening, coordinating with existing leadership, and choosing another name.

Good process leads to good results, and bad process to bad.  In the Cyclist LAPD Task Force good conversations, deliberative action, commitment to empathy, and honesty are the prevailing themes.  Good process, good results.  The bike plan update process went dark for 18 months with a group of planners and staff that were hostile to the community.  Result?  The plan is in a do-over phase.  Bad process, bad results.

(There’s been some great coverage of both Critical Mass and the Blood In & Hit and Run protests. Check out Alex de Cordoba’s blog – the Engaged Observer – for Critical Mass coverage, as well as this Midnight Ridazz thread for a deluge of videos, and the photo gallery. WeHo Daily covered the ride and protests, as did SoCal Soft Pedal, among many others. Post your links in the comments!)

On Friday, at 7:45 pm, a thousand cyclists turned the bend and confronted a mean red sun, low in the horizon, melting West LA. The crowd slacked and quieted, drawing a deep breath while fixie punks, bike commuters, and LAPD bike patrol took in the reds.

The cyclists of Los Angeles Critical Mass paused at the corner of Venice and Crenshaw, and then turned north, heading for Beverly Hills, and a protest at the Beverly Hills Courthouse.  When they entered Beverly Hills the LAPD escort peeled off, respecting the BHPD jurisdiction. 1300 cyclists, according to BHPD estimates, arrived to the sight of riot police arrayed on the courthouse steps.

LA Critical Mass, July 2010. Photo by Barleye.

The riot police wore smiles. I shook Sgt Ceja’s hand, and he reminded me that we had met on Tuesday. “We know you guys are good, we’re just here to dissuade any of the troublemakers who sometimes take advantage of large groups,” Sgt Ceja explained.

Tuesday cyclists stood on the same steps, many covered in fake blood, to protest the plague of hit and runs which afflicts this city, and which has taken down so many in the cycling community.  Oddly enough, though cyclists are the first to take this issue on in recent years, they are less likely to be the victim of a hit and run. At least, according to reported collisions – 38% of all collisions in Los Angeles are hit and run whereas 23% bike involved collisions end as hit and run. Either number is obscene but it’s clear that the pain is shared – motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians can all expect to be victimized by hit and run.

With Sgt Ceja’s input we set up a PA, and speakers took to the mic. Only a hundred or so of the 1300 cyclists approached our impromptu stage, so I walked into the crowd to explain our purpose. I found out that many, maybe most, of the cyclists present are not tuned into the greater movement in Los Angeles. I gave them a crude introduction. I asked crowds of 30 or 50 cyclists if they had ever been hit, if they had been left afterward? I asked them if when they had been hit, if it hadn’t been taken seriously by the motorist or law enforcement? With each group, each time, their were nods and shouts – most everyone had been hit or had a friend who had.

It’s the sort of conversation we ought to be having in neighborhood councils and community meetings. Who has been the victim of a hit and run? What was the outcome? We can go broader – who has been the victim of a serious crash? Who feels safe on the streets when driving, walking or biking? Or broader still – who is happy with LA’s street-life?

We can ask next – do you want to do something about it? Many cyclists who I asked this question gave me puzzled looks. In talking with cyclists, and non-cyclists, I find most people haven’t considered that we could change LA’s streets. It’s taken as a given by most that our streets are unsafe, unfriendly, and dysfunctional.

The speakers argued that night that we can change our streets. They are our streets: the condition of our streets is a product of every citizen’s relationship to them. Changing them is a simple matter of changing how citizen’s use them, and that is only a matter of changing how citizen’s think of them. Readers, aren’t we all persuasive people? Can’t we change hearts and minds?

Cyclists ask for bike lanes because it offers a (perceived) safe place on the roads for cyclists. We’re told there’s no room, that our streets are built out. I don’t agree, but all we really want is safety and respect. If we have the respect of motorists, we don’t need the space. Our interest is getting safety and respect, and if we can’t get space from LADOT, we can work with LAPD to get respect.

LAPD asks for more officers because they feel it is needed to police the streets better. They’re told that there isn’t the budget for it, that we don’t have the money. What LAPD leadership wants, as I perceive it, is to be able to better police these streets. Ultimately they want a safe streetlife for Los Angelinos. If a positive relationship with cyclists, who provide another set of eyes and ears on the streets, is a way toward safer streets LAPD will pursue it.

Cyclists and LAPD have discovered a common interest in safe & respectful streetlife The next step is for motorists & pedestrians to join the cabal. Once we all make great streetlife a priority, it will become a reality.

(Dr. Alex Thompson is the President of BikesideLA.org, a cyclist advocacy organization, and the Treasure and Community Director of Mar Vista Community Council. He can be reached at alexcthompson@gmail.com.)

"Cool Ass" Mike Bowers of 1000Bikes.org (via The Engaged Observer)

Blood In protest, Photo by Gary Kavanagh

“The drivers that hit us and run are driving in your neighborhoods, past your kid’s school, your mother’s church, and your house” – that was the message from cyclists to citizens at a protest on Tuesday.  The protest was sparked by a light sentence handed down by Judge Elden S. Fox last Tuesday in a case of felony hit and run.

Seven months ago Celine Mahdavi clobbered cyclist Louis Deliz so hard his teeth were left in her car.  Mahdavi drove away, leaving Deliz to die in the street.  Deliz was rushed to Cedar Sinai where his life was saved by modern medicine.  He spent 8 days in a medically induced coma, 11 days in the ICU and 49 days total hospitalized.  Today Deliz suffers from debilitating physical injuries and suffers panic attacks and seizures.

For felony hit and run, Judge Fox sentenced Mahdavi to 90 days community service, 3 years probation, and ordered her to pay full restitution to Deliz.  Mahdavi will serve no jail time for nearly killing Deliz, and her 90 days of community service amounts to 720 hours, much less than 1176 hours Deliz spent in a hospital bed.

When Mahdavi was breathalyzed several hours after the hit and run, she blew a .05, in violation of California’s zero tolerance law.  Judge Fox therefore included alcohol counseling as part of her sentence, and stipulated that even when Mahdavi turns 21, as part of her probation she is not allowed to drink.

While Fox addressed the drunk part of the drunk driving (2 counts: felony hit and run, violation of CA zero tolerance law for underage drinking), he did nothing to address the driving aspect of the felony count. Mahdavi’s license is currently suspended, but not by the justice system, by the DMV.  If the DMV chooses, Mahdavi could be back on the roads in January.  She’ll be driving to work on your streets, past your kid’s school, you mother’s church, and your house.

Joining her will be Glenn Gritzner, who hit cycling icon “Roadblock” and fled the scene.  Gritzner plead “no contest” to the charge of misdemeanor hit and run, and paid a small fine.  In the style of hit and run, Gritzner didn’t attend the hearing, but sent his attorney on his behalf.  He drives a Jaguar, and he’ll be driving it past your kid’s school, your mother’s church, and your house.

Sounds like cyclists have a problem, doesn’t it?  Sounds like cycling is an unsafe thing and we should probably stick to cars and buses.  Not exactly.

It’s worse for motorists … 38% of ALL collisions in LA are hit and run.  For cyclists the figure is 23%. Our problem is your problem.  Pedestrians get it worst of all – more than 1/3 of all traffic deaths in LA in 2008 are pedestrians.

Tuesday, 60 cyclists stood in front of the Beverly Hills Courthouse, where Judge Fox gave his tepid sentence, and agreed on this: these are our streets, they ought to be a safe, they can be safe, we can make them safe, and we will make them safe.  We are committed to this.

Today the streets are dangerous.  They’re dangerous because we let them become dangerous, we let them stay dangerous.  I allow it, you allow it, we all let this happen.  We allow people like Mahdavi and Gritzner to drive.  We make stupid excuses about needing a license to get to work.  Is it more important that dangerous drivers get to work, or is our safety more important?  We send people for alcohol counseling but we don’t take away their license.  We let people who drive carelessly, who drive recklessly, who don’t care one whit for human life, we let them go out there and do it again.

We are rewarded for it with oppressive, unwelcoming street lives.

These are our streets and this is our fault.  It is our responsibility to do something about it.  We do have the power to take back our streets.  We can insist that we step into a welcoming environment.  We can demand that LA’s streetlife be civilized and enjoyable, safe and secure.  These are our streets, and we control their destiny.

Drivers who hit and run are, simply put, ill.  Their self interest overrides their empathy at the most critical moment, when they have a human obligation to render aid.  You may argue that self interest is paramount, but you would be wrong.  Greater is the instinct, greater in civilization and greater in nature, to attend to suffering.  Drivers who hit and leave, ignoring that instinct, should not be driving.

Bikeside LA, a cyclist advocacy organization, will seek legislation in Sacramento that makes the revocation of hit and run drivers’ licenses mandatory upon conviction.  We hope that activists and community leaders of all stripes will join us in our initiative to put Life Before License – a small step toward restoring life to our streets.  Join us!  If you would like to support, endorse, collaborate or participate in our efforts, email me at alexcthompson@gmail.com.

Die-In at LACM, RIP Jesus Castillo

Last year when Jesus Castillo was killed LA Critical Mass went to the site of his death, joined together around his ghost bike, and held a die-in to honor him, and call attention to the driver’s crime.

A little over a year later we are still plagued by hit and runs.  I humbly suggest that those at the front of Los Angeles Critical Mass, who set it’s direction and pace, take the ride to the Beverly Hills Courthouse, where protesters gathered on Tuesday to decry hit and run.

Here’s a route proposal:

A suggested LACM route - south on Western, west on Venice, north on Crenshaw, west on Olympic, continue west on San Vicente, continue west on Burton Way

I respect the fact that LA Critical Mass has no leaders per se, and I value that the route is set by the collective will.  Let’s all work together and bring the ride to the courthouse, a symbolic site of failed justice, and make ourselves heard!

By the way – this video from Tuesday was just released by filmmaker Rick Darge:

On Tuesday, July 27th, and Friday, July 30th, cyclists will gather at the Beverly Hills Courthouse to protest the tepid sentence handed down by Judge Elden S. Fox for Celine Mahdavi.  Mahdavi hit cyclist Louis Deliz and left him to die in the street on December 1st, 2009; Deliz was hospitalized for 49 days.

Mahdavi pleaded “no contest” to felony hit and run charges and threw herself on the mercy of the court, instead of accepting the plea deal offered by the DA.  Judge Fox gave her 90 days of community service, and 3 years of probation.  Mahdavi will spend less time in community service – 720 hours – than Deliz spent in the hospital – 1176 hours.

Cyclists are calling it the last straw.  Bikeside LA President Alex Thompson said “this sentence is symbolic of the lack of respect cyclists get throughout the justice system.”

Many expressed frustration that Fox made no effort to restrict Mahdavi’s driving privileges, leaving decisions about the status of Mahdavi’s license at the discretion of the DMV.

At both events Bikeside LA will announce a new campaign:  Life before License.  Life before License will specifically address hit and run, seeking state level legislation to change how hit and run is treated by courts.

The Friday protest may be joined by the hundreds of cyclists participating in LA Critical Mass – the ride which recently drew headlines when it clashed with LAPD.  LAPD and riders made peace in June when LAPD facillitated with a large police escort.

Event details:

Tuesday, July 27th, 6:15 pm
Beverly Hills Courthouse
9355 Burton Way
Blood In Press Conference
interviews to follow press conference
open mic available to attendees after press conference

Friday, July 30th, 8:15 pm
Beverly Hills Courthouse
9355 Burton Way
Press Conference
interviews to follow press conference
open mic available to attendees after press conference

That’s what you get for riding bikes Chris.

“When I got to the scene I jumped off and asked why my friend was being detained. I asked twice more and the officer told me to come over and then hand cuffed me and put me against the wall.” – Justin

That’s what you get for mouthing off Justin.

Chris's ticket. Note the "PED". Ignore the $ signs - someone used a scanner running on a software trial.

In the early morning of July 7th two men were cuffed and searched at 8th & Main in Downtown Los Angeles – detained for more than half an hour by the rank and file of LAPD Central Traffic. When all was said and done they were released with tickets for “no front light”, citations issued by Officer Townsend. A “no front light” citation is correctable – if you put a front light on your bike and present it to a officer of the California Highway Patrol, he or she can sign off on it, at which point the fine drops from about $100 to $10. It’s a fix-it ticket!

So why were these two detained for the better part of the hour and released with slap on the wrist tickets? Put another way, why were two officers and a police cruiser preoccupied for half an hour by such a triviality?  Is that an reasonable use of police resources?

Don’t ask that of Officer Townsend. It wasn’t her, but her partner Officer Sanchez who initiated the detention, and insisted on citing Justin and Chris. It was Sanchez who told witnesses that they didn’t have a right to know why he cuffed Justin and Chris, because “they weren’t the ones arrested.” It was Sanchez who allegedly turned off the front light mounted clearly on Justin’s handle bars. It was Sanchez who told Chris that he was ticketing him for running a red light, in contradiction to the citation Chris received.

Sanchez might say that Justin was argumentative – it’s remarkable how often reasonable inquiry is construed as argumentative (and what is cite worthy about argumentative?) by overzealous officers.  Even so, even if Justin was, why did Sanchez cuff Chris before Justin even arrived, particularly when by all accounts Chris was quiet and the picture of compliance?

On the other hand, it’s Townsend who could use a refresher on California law. In both citations Townsend wrote “PED” in the vehicle information field, indicating that the recipients were not motorists, but pedestrians. As you might know, pedestrians are not required to have front headlights. So you could question why Townsend wrote citations which apply to cyclists to pedestrians. The citations are, to borrow a phrase of Stephen Box, self contradicting!

Justin's ticket. Note the "PED". Ignore the $ signs - someone used a scanner running on a software trial.

This happens again and again. It happened to Paul ages ago in Hollywood.  It happened to me, and three others last March.  It happened and then some at LA Critical Mass in May.  It happens countless times when we don’t know or hear about it.  And I mean “countless”; LAPD does not record handcuffings, so we have no sense for how often they occur, or who gets cuffed.

Every person who is cuffed by LAPD becomes a detractor for life of the department. If they’re cuffed for thirty minutes and released with a petty fix-it ticket, that’s an detractor for life who has a convincing story to tell their peers. If they’re cuffed for thirty minutes and released with a petty fix-it ticket which involves potential police misconduct – Officer Sanchez turning off Justin’s light – that’s a detractor life with a convincing story, one that might eventually be told to a jury.

This is all alarming. It all detracts from real police work. And all of it convinces me that it is past time for LAPD to address when cuffing is appropriate.

However, anyone who was paying attention knows that those funds would have been $1.95 million, not $3.27 million, if it weren’t for the efforts and scrutiny of one Bikeside board member – Stephen M Box.

When the “10% for bikes and peds” motion came before LA City Council Transportation Committee it was Stephen Box that noted that LADOT had calculated 10% incorrectly, first in City Watch and then in public comment:

The 10% commitment had advocates celebrating but a check of the math revealed a small $7.3 million problem, the LADOT had calculated the 10% on net funds yielding $10.8 million over the next 5 years instead of on gross which would yield $18.1 million.

LADOT used the net return, instead of the gross return, reducing the 10% commitment.  Box mentioned this to the committee, and the Chief Legislative Analyst [CLA] (who some say is more powerful than the councilmembers themselves) agreed:

as I stood to leave, the City’s Legislative Analyst (CLA) said “You’re right.” I waited but that was it. I asked “So then you’ll fix it?” It was that simple. “Yes.”  Box’s comment led to an increase of 68% in funding ( $18.1 / $10.8 = 1.68 ) from the 10% motion, which amounts to $1.32 million this year, and $7.3 million over 5 years.

It’s all available online – check out the November 18th, 2009 meeting of the Transportation Committee meeting (99 Mb).  Stephen’s comment, and followup from staff, begin at 56:40.

LACBC – be honest with your narrative.  You attribute the success to the efforts of three organizations, but 40% of the money ( [18.1 -10.8] / 18.1 ) can be attributed to Box’s public comment, his City Watch article, and the CLA.  Congratulations to Stephen Box and the CLA for freeing up $1.32 million in additional funds for cyclists and pedestrians for this (fiscal) year, and congratulations to the three org coalition (if indeed LACBC’s narrative is accurate on that point) for the other $1.95 million.

(Edit – some may have trouble following the ball here.  The $18.1 mil figure is for 5 years.  It would have been $10.8 mil but for Box’s efforts.  That’s 5 years.  For this fiscal year, the amounts are $3.27 mil and $1.95.  The “difference due to Box” is $7.3 mil over 5 years or $1.32 mil this year.)

Lindsay Lohan will likely serve 14 days of the 90 day sentence in County jail she began today.  She violated the terms of her probation on DUI charges.

The same day that Lohan turned herself in to the Beverly Hills Courthouse, the case against Celine Mahdavi was scheduled for a pretrial hearing on the 3rd floor.  I know because I walked through the gauntlet of photographers so I could surrender my tools and my camera to security to go upstairs and observe.

Celine Mahdavi hit Louis Deliz so hard that his teeth were embedded in her car, then drove away, Deliz’ body dislodging from her car and landing face down.  He lost most of the lower half of his jaw, all his lower teeth, broke both legs, broke nearly all his fingers, broke his hip, and punctured a lung (if memory serves.)  Just a few days ago, Louis had a massive seizure, and he is still seeing double from it.  To this day he can’t walk right, he can’t talk right, he can’t see right, and he has nightmares and flashbacks.  Mahdavi, 18 at the time, was pulled over a half mile from the accident where she tested positive for alcohol.

A few hours after Lohan began her 90 days in jail, Judge Elden S. Fox sentenced Mahdavi to 90 days of community service – 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, to be done in a 180 day period.  Most likely Mahdavi will be picking up trash with CalTrans or taking part in graffiti removal.

Fox also ordered that Mahdavi should pay full restitution to Deliz, serve 36 months probation, take part in alcohol counseling, participate in the Hospitals and Morgue program.

"She shouldn't drive unless she has a valid driver's license" - Judge Eldon S. Fox to hit and run perpetrator Celine Mahdavi, who permanently disabled Louis Deliz

The prosecution offered Mahdavi a plea of 1 year in jail and 5 years probation.  Instead, Mahdavi’s defense submitted a memorandum of disposition, effectively falling on the mercy of the court, and allowing the judge to sentence Mahdavi without trial.  Fox offered the far lesser sentence, with a variety of self contradictory justification.  Sometimes calling the collision an “accident” – implying that there was no intent without explanation – Fox explained how he considered a 1 year, 6 month, then a 4 month, and finally a 90 day sentence in County jail.  Finally, he explained, he settled on no jail time at all (or 1 day for each count, but 1 day also credited for each count.)

Fox talked tough to Mahdavi saying “I do not believe for one minute that you did not realize you were in a collision for a cyclist” and went on to specify that she should have known that he injured someone.  He explained to Deliz’ family that he found it hard to look at the photographs and evidence.  “My heart goes out to you”, Fox said.

Fox told Mahdavi that she cannot carry any deadly weapons during the 3 years of her probation, listing guns and knives as examples of deadly weapons.  Fox did not list cars as deadly weapons, only ordering that Mahdavi should not drive “unless she has a valid driver’s license.”

Know this cyclists – no one will defend you.  If you are hit it is unlikely the police will care.  If they do care, it is unlikely it will go to court.  If it does go to court, it is unlikely the judge will care.  You are on your own.  If you don’t have a big family like Louis does – one that will step in and step up to take care of you – then you can’t get hit.  You can’t get hit because you won’t get treated fairly.  I know getting hit isn’t under your control, just understand that no one that matters cares about you, and the “justice” system will not take care of you.

There is basically no reason not to hit cyclists and pedestrians – it’s open season.

(edited for correct spelling of “Celine” – thanks commenter Rach Stevo)

(Edit: Celine Mahdavi’s license is currently suspended it is my understanding, as a result of her not responding to inquiries from the DMV re this incident.  Lawyers at the hearing seemed to agree that she will be able to apply for removal of the suspension early next year.  What’s absurd to me is that she would be allowed to obtain a license at all, that her license is suspended and not revoked, and that the judge would leave this decision to the DMV, rather than ordering it suspended.

So, no Mahdavi on the streets (at least legally speaking) now, but possibly early next year.)

Alec & Red show the world how tall bikes solve problems.

Tonight, while executives and lawyers and lobbyists and assistants wined and dined and worked the room, while producers and directors and agents and actors made war and contracts with blackberries and iPhones, while all of them struggled mightily to meet in the middle, two men from two worlds crossed the gap to shake hands and take turns riding a bike in the most surpassing act of diplomacy I have ever witnessed.

Alec the cyclist and Red the officer formed a friendship and affirmed for all that the tone of cyclist & LAPD relations will no longer be one of antagonism or antipathy, nor even one of collaboration and cooperation, but simply a relationship of friendship and support.

Red was among approximately 60 officers mustered tonight for LAPD’s response to LA Critical Mass (LACM). With so many head cracking batons arrayed, cyclist gathering for Critical Mass kept their distance, restrained by memories of yelling, sirens, cuffs and searches. But the atmosphere of doom and gloom was disrupted by the relaxed and smiling demeanor of LAPD. The rumor mill suggested that LAPD had positive intentions toward LACM. It was unnerving . . . it almost felt like things might be OK.

So perhaps that is what prompted Alec to walk with his bizarre tall bike into the throng of cops and ask if anyone wanted to try it. Alec is positively mischievous, in the sense that his mischief leads to positive outcomes. He brings sidewalk chalk to parties and jump ropes to festivals, and he dupes you into having fun. Since I have known him he has relentlessly enabled full grown adults to engage in the fun of child’s play. He is not so much revered in the bike community, as he is loved and cherished by any and all who meet him.

Alec’s bike is different story. It is twice as tall as a normal bike, so that when you ride it, you are 9 feet tall. He rides it hundreds of miles weekly from his home in El Segundo to West LA or even Downtown. The problem is – twice as tall means twice the fall. For me, as an uncoordinated clod, all attempts to ride tall bikes have ended in ankle damage. Alec’s invitation to ride was a quiet dare for the tough guys in uniform.

Red stepped up. Red told me later that he used to ride bike patrol . . . 10 years ago. “They called me up and asked me to ride tonight”, he said. Now he drives a cruiser in Sylmar, answering patrol calls. “This (riding LACM) is way better” he told me with a grin, book ending that moderately serious remark with wise cracks. Simply put, this is a guy who likes to ride.

Alec gave Red some tips and instructions on riding his tall bike, and then Red jumped on that thing and rode it around the plaza, to the hoots and hollers and laughs and cheers of bike patrol and critical mass riders. Then Captain Blake and LACM icons Roadblock and Bike Bike Dan, gave tips and instructions to the crowd on riding LACM safely, and we all jumped on our bikes, and hooted and hollered and laughed and cheered as LAPD and LACM rode together through the mean streets of LA. LACM barreled through LA, safely, respectfully, as one mass, with only a smattering of incidents – to be expected when 600 people ride a cumulative 12,000 miles – and a good time was had by all.

Red rides tall

LAPD and cyclists, Alec and Red took different paths to reach this moment. Alec is the artist who changes hearts and minds by riding a bizarro bike all over creation. Red is out there responding to tense situations – domestic abuse and car accidents – with confidence and a disarming sense of humor. Cyclists, throughout LA, struggle for recognition and respect, while LAPD is working hard to better engage the community and improve its reputation with citizens. All four of them took courageous steps today with the best of intentions – Alec stepped into a ring of 60 armed men and women, Red jumped on a contraption that guaranteed injury, cyclists and LAPD reached out to former antagonists and found new common ground. Somehow, they all came together at one place, at one time, and it’s all a little weird.

In Hamlet, Bill Shakespeare wrote of death as the undiscovered country:

The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

We prefer the present and the known, even in the ways that they are bad, because we know them; we fear the undiscovered because, even if it might be better, it is unknown.

I feel a little uneasy with what happened tonight – it’s hard for me to believe that such a positive relationship can persist. But today I believe that I witnessed the death of antagonism between two great powers in Los Angeles, the two gutsiest powers in LA’s streets – cyclists and LAPD. I look forward to, with courage and clear purpose, exploring this new and undiscovered country of friendship and support.

(A special recognition is due to Chief Charlie Beck and newly minted US citizen Stephen M Box, the two big men who cut such an intimidating presence to us smaller folk, for standing toe to toe, eye to eye, and with courage and a handshake, forging a new relationship that led to the growing rapport between LAPD and cyclists today.)

Sgt David Krumer of LAPD, liason to the cycling community

Stephen M Box interviews Commander Villegas, who is directs LAPD's end of the Cyclist LAPD Task Force

Big Bike Dan

Glenn Bailey, Chairman of the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee

Roadblock makes announcements to the crowd about the ride

Joe Borfo in his fish costume - he rode the whole ride in it.

Jennifer Beatty steals my style with the star sunglasses

This is what happens when a cat walks through a spider web. What? "That's not bike related" you say? I beg to differ - this is my blog and I do what I want! Cats are an important aspect of biking.

In his post “Who’s the man behind the curtain of L.A. bicycling?” Ted Rogers shifts the blame for LADOT’s cycling failures off Michelle Mowery and onto a new target, John Fisher, Assistant General Manager of Operations at LADOT.  He targets Fisher in part because he believes that Fisher is 2nd in Command at LADOT, and therefore in a position to stop the production of bike facilities.   In doing so he insults Rita Robinson, the General Manager at DOT, alleging that she can’t manage her department.

Rogers, an LACBC board member, risks making two new powerful enemies for cyclists, and yet his post is not factually correct.  In this post I will look at his belief that John Fisher is 2nd in Command, and show that it’s not correct.  In another post I will look at the other failures of fact in Rogers’ post.

As Rogers spins it, John Fisher is the man behind the curtain.  Rita Robinson runs DOT, the buck stops with her, but Rogers dismisses her on the basis that Robinson does not have a background in engineering.  Rogers implies that, without a degree in engineering, Robinson cannot manage engineers.  Therefore, if the failures are ones of engineering, the responsibility must fall on  Fisher, since Fisher is 2nd in command to Rita Robinson and an engineer.

One problem with that, among others, is that there is no 2nd in command at DOT.  There are three sorts of 2nd in command: the true 2nd in command, the almost 2nd in command, and the de facto 2nd in command.  Fisher (and likely none of the Assistant General Managers at LADOT) does not fit the description of any of these 2nd in commands.

The True 2nd in Command:

The true 2nd in command is a person who is immediately below the boss, and has all the same powers as the boss, except that the boss can tell them what to do.  As a Trekkie, the best example I can think of for this is Captain Picard and Commander Riker from Star Trek.  Captain Picard has the ultimate decision making power on the Enterprise, and god’s gift to women Cmd Riker has it too.  The only difference is, Riker has to defer to Picard – and does so readily cause he’s such a good guy.  However, when Picard is away, Riker runs the show.

There aren’t too many true 2nds left in government, but when they do exist, they look like this in the org chart:

This is what an org chart looks like for an organization with a 2nd in Command

First the boss, then the 2nd, then everyone else.

Now, compare that with the LADOT org chart:

Offices and Assistant General Managers reporting directly to General Manager Robinson at LADOT

All of the Offices and Assistant General Managers circled in red report directly to Robinson.  With multiple employees reporting directly to Robinson, no one fits the definition of a true 2nd in command.

Did I just use a Star Trek analogy?  *wince*  We better move on!

The Almost 2nd in Command

The almost 2nd in command is an employee who is immediately beneath the boss, but there are others who also report directly to the boss.  However, this employee controls the vast majority of the resources or employees in the department, so that in all but a few instances they are in the next highest power position.

A good example of this is LAPD.  Apart from the Police Commission, which oversees all police activity, and the Office of the Inspector General, Chief Beck sits atop the entirety of LAPD (LAPD org chart, pdf).  Assistant Chief Paysinger reports directly to Beck.  There are many staff who report directly to Beck – Chief of Staff, Director of the Office of Special Operations, The Special Assistant for Constitutional Policing, etc etc – and not to Paysinger, so Paysinger is not a true 2nd.

However, of all the staff who report directly to Beck, Paysinger controls most of the resources.  He runs the Office of Operations, which houses the vast majority of the 9960 total sworn officers in LAPD.  Almost everything that LAPD does runs through Operations, which means that almost everything that LAPD does falls in Paysinger’s office.  Effectively, Paysinger is almost 2nd in command to Beck.

Is there an almost 2nd in command at LADOT?  No, there isn’t.  Rogers puts Fisher forward as 2nd in command, but Fisher’s Office of Operations at LADOT only houses 500 of LADOT’s 2000 employees.  Controlling 25% of the department’s resources can’t be construed as controlling the department.

What about one of the other Assistant General Managers who controls a different office at LADOT?  Well, if Fisher controls 25% of the department’s resources, that means the most in other Assistant General Manager can control is 75%, and that can’t be construed as being almost 2nd in command.

There’s no almost 2nd in command at LADOT.

De Facto 2nd in Command

The final possibility is that somebody reporting to the General Manager is not a true 2nd in command, and isn’t an almost 2nd in command, but dominates the department politically.  They may not have the hard power to order around other people in the department, but because they have immense political power, they’re effectively a 2nd in command.  De facto, they are the second in the command.

Joe Linton alleged that Fisher is the de facto 2nd in command at DOT:

Fisher, as the head of Transportation Operations, is tied for the #2 slot. Given his seniority and the relative power between him and the other AGMs (whose roles are more administrative, and less directly responsible for LA’s streets), it’s clear to me that Fisher is #2.

It’s a more subjective argument, because there’s no org chart of political power.  In my opinion it’s not the case.

Amir Sedadi is the Assistant General Manager of the Office of Parking Management and Regulation at LADOT, better known as Parking.  Like Fisher, Sedadi reports directly to Robinson.  Typically, Operations is a powerful in a department.  However, at LADOT the Office of Parking operates all of the city’s public parking structures, all of the cities parking meters, and issues all of the parking tickets.  That means two things; first, that much of what would normally fall in Operations actually falls in Sedadi’s department, weakening the power of Operations.

Second, it means that Sedadi’s office generates revenue.  In the last fiscal year, Sedadi’s office generated $134 million in parking fines, and $84 million in parking use taxes (City of LA Budget, p. 375.)  A government entity that spends money, like Operations, is at a disadvantage to one which generates money, like Sedadi’s Parking.  Entities that spend money are always fighting for scraps to maintain their budget.  Entities that generate money are power brokers.  Particularly now, where two years in a row the City has nearly on gone bankrupt.

Interestingly, an anonymous source says that Fisher is rarely seen with Robinson in City Hall.  The same source says Sedadi is frequently seen with Robinson.

On the whole, Sedadi, not Fisher, appears most likely to be 2nd in command.  However, it can’t be ignored that Fisher has a great deal of power, as do other office and bureau heads at DOT.  It’s my guess that there is no de facto second in command at LADOT; LADOT looks to me like a balanced department politically.  Certainly though, it is not Fisher.

Wrap:

Some might argue that there are other reasons why Fisher is the problem.  For instance, any bikeway facility design must ultimately pass through Operations, before passing to the Bureau of Street Services – a separate department which is in charge of implementation -  which does the actual striping and surfacing.  Someone might argue that Operations is refusing to approve bikeways designs that are submitted to it.  It’s an allegation that raises more questions:  could responsibility lie with the Bikeways Section for not designing bikeways?  Or with the Bureau of Street Services for not striping approved facilities?  These are possibilities that don’t get serious attention in Rogers’ post – the possibility isn’t even mentioned.

Regardless, Rogers’ allegation that Fisher is 2nd in command doesn’t hold water, which calls  the whole post into question.

Rogers wrote:

So is John Fisher the one responsible for the department’s overwhelming focus on automotive throughput and the massive failure to implement the 1996 bike plan — let alone virtually anything else to support bicycling in Los Angeles, including the woefully watered-down first draft of the new bike plan intended to replace it?

The jury’s still out.

But it doesn’t look good.

Using the language of judges and juries, Rogers passes judgment on Fisher.  He asks the reader a leading question, then scolds the reader for rushing to judgment, writing “the jury’s still out”.  Finally, he informs the reader that it doesn’t look good, confirming the readers earlier suspicions, but now with the higher tone of withholding judgment.  Rogers condemns Fisher while leaving himself an out: “I didn’t actually say Fisher is responsible, I just asked the question.”

I object.  Commit to the opinion or don’t ask the leading question.  Otherwise, drop the leading tone, and just write that you don’t know.

In Rogers’ own style:

Did Ted Rogers write a post attacking a powerful bureaucrat as responsible for the City of LA’s cycling failures, without doing solid research?

The jury’s still out.

But it doesn’t look good.

If you’re looking for a job in bike activism and education, C.I.C.L.E. is hiring a Managing Director.  Under the direction of the Steering Committee, the Managing Director will oversee all fundraising, programming, events, and advocacy efforts of C.I.C.L.E.

C.I.C.L.E. gave me my start in mainstream activism.  Mandi Trimas wanted to create a system of bike mentors who could walk nervous newbies through the beginning trials of bike commuting.  I joined up with Mandi and C.I.C.L.E. promoted our efforts through their website.  The effort eventually died, but I always appreciated that C.I.C.L.E. were willing to support untested activists on a new project.

If you’re looking for a job in bike activism, C.I.C.L.E. would be a great place to start.  Download the job description here.

It’s a draft plan because the citizens of LA have a right and a duty to take part in an open and transparent revision process.  While the email below emphasizes that the drafting process has been inclusive, with one exception the public has not seen any updates to the draft proposed bike plan since December – seven months.  We have been assured by City Planning officials that the draft will undergo more revisions.  Good.  The public hasn’t had sufficient opportunity to take part in the drafting process thus far, so it will be nice to get a chance to get our hands dirty.

Second, it’s a proposal plan because the citizens of LA have no obligation to consent to replace the current plan with the draft proposed plan.  I’m not saying we should or should not adopt the draft proposed plan (I haven’t read it yet), but it is important to recognize that we have the power to refuse.  If the draft proposed plan is not a substantial improvement over the current plan it would be logical to refuse.  If the drafters of the plan revise in bad faith, a protest refusal is reasonable.  If the draft proposed plan is great, if it is revised in good faith, then I will be exhilarated to support its approval.

So in the spirit of good process, here is the original email, with a few words I added in bold:

To all Interested Parties:

The City of Los Angeles is pleased to release the draft proposed 2010 Los Angeles Bicycle Plan. The 2010 draft proposed Bicycle Plan is a comprehensive update of the current Bicycle Plan first adopted in 1996 and re-adopted by the City Council in 2002 and 2007. The 2010 draft proposed Bicycle Plan (2010 Plan), a component of the Transportation Element, (an element of the City*s General Plan), is part of the City*s commitment to transform Los Angeles from an auto-centric City to a City with a multi-modal transportation system. The 2010 draft proposed Plan designates 1,633 miles of bikeway facilities and proposes two new bicycle networks (Citywide and Neighborhood). Additionally, the 2010 draft proposed Bicycle Plan includes a Technical Design Handbook that will assist both City staff and residents in selecting and designing facilities for future bikeways that are safe and consistent with current standards and guidelines.

The 2010 draft proposed Los Angeles Bicycle Plan is a result of extensive fieldwork, numbers public workshops (only nine), and suggestions from thousands of public comments received from September 2009 draft proposed Bicycle Plan.  The draft proposed Bicycle Plan is a joint effort between the Department of City Planning an Department of Transportation.

The complete document and maps will be available on the project website [www.labikeplan.org] by end of the day June 18th with printed copies available for public review at the City*s Central Library and eight regional libraries and the Department of City Planning*s Downtown and Van Nuys Public Counters by June 30th, 2010.

A series of workshops/public hearing will be held between September 7-18, 2010 to take public testimony and comment.

Please see the attached flyer for additional facts on the 2010 Bicycle Plan and information regarding the public hearing process.

Jordann Turner
Los Angeles Department of City Planning
2010 Bicycle Plan-Project Manager
200 N. Spring Street, Rm 721
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: 213.978.1379 | Fax: 213.978.4656

I’m outside the Beverly Hills Municipal Courthouse awaiting the arrival of Louis “Birdman” Deliz. The air is crisp and full of the murmur of morning gridlock along Burton Way. Louis shows up, I give him a handshake and we wait for more people to make the scene.

I learned about Louis’ devastating hit and run several months ago and just recently we met at the Bikerowave. Louis was allegedly left hooked by Celine Mahdavi, then age 18, and her Mercedes SUV at the intersection of La Cienega Boulevard and Holloway Drive. She is charged with two felony counts: Felony Hit & Run, and Felony DUI under the age of 21. She got out on a $10,000 bond the next morning. Louis wasn’t so lucky: he spent 11 days in the ICU, 9 days in a coma, and 49 days in the hospital. Louis suffered massive injuries to his face, broke both his hands and his hip is now made out of steel. After a 3 year PRO cycling career riding with strongest and fastest cyclists in the world he had to depend on a machine to keep him alive. Celine Mahdavi might have taken away his physique; but, the “Birdman’s” determination to make her pay the price in court is strong.

We’re now in the wood paneled courtroom and taking up a row of seats to support Louis. To our right is Celine Mahdavi with a few family and friends. She looks sullen until a brief conversation with her defense attorney and she casts a short lived, beaming smile. I wonder, to myself, what is that about? We’ve been waiting a long time since the arraignment in February to get to the next step in the case: the preliminary hearing (March 22 was the initial hearing date that was moved to today, June 11). We just want this case to get started so Louis can move on with his life.

The court is called to order, and after a Pledge of Allegiance, Judge Eldon S. Fox calls Louis’ case. Immediately Celine Mahdavi’s defense attorney states that due to being unable to obtain the evidence of Louis’ damaged bicycle he wants the preliminary hearing to be postponed and moved 30 days. A harsh uproar erupts from our side of the courtroom. The defense attorney states that he does not know where the bike is and has no way to let his expert witness to examine the evidence. Another outcry breaks out from our side of the courtroom.

The fact is Louis’ bike is being held by the Sheriff’s Department. It’s locked away in storage locker somewhere. A sad, lonely, mangled bicycle left in a dark corner of The System.

To our dismay the prosecuting attorney accepts the defense attorney’s request and amends it with 15 additional days. 45 days until the preliminary hearing, which we expected to take place today, is just too long to wait again. Our row bursts with anger and upset. After some back and forth about schedules, vacations, and furlough days the Judge sets the preliminary hearing date for July 20, 2010. The attorneys agree and the defendant, Celine Mahdavi gives her consent.

I think I catch a smirk flash across Ms. Mahdavi’s face as she turns to exit the court. It quickly morphs back into a look of dread as we watch her return to the security of her friends and family on the far side of the courtroom. 45 more days until her next court date. 45 more days we wait till justice can take it’s course.

Want to help Louis “Birdman” Deliz and show that his hit and run has hurt the whole bicycling community? Write a statement of how it has affected you and show up to the Beverly Hills Municipal Court on July 20, 2010 to read it. Write a letter to the District Attorney stating your concerns about the case and it’s delay in bringing Celine Mahdavi to justice:

[Celine Mahdavi (Case #SA073459) – Victim – Louis Deliz]

Steven Katz, Esq.
Deputy District Attorney
Beverly Hills Area Office
9355 Burton Way, Room 400
Beverly Hills CA 90210

It’s bullshit.  Rogers gets it wrong from the intro to the conclusion.  The bulk of the article is speculative commentary based on blog comments by Ramon Martinez, LACBC sharrows program lead, Joe Linton, LACBC co-founder, and Josef Bray-Ali, Bike Oven founder.  The article gets critical facts wrong – for example, Rogers alleges Fisher is 2nd in command at DOT, when there is no 2nd in command at DOT – and steers readers to damning conclusions with leading questions in a failure of journalistic ethics.

This follows hot on the heels of Rogers criticizing the Bike Kitchen based on another blogger’s negative review – an article in which he provides plenty of commentary based on no direct experience.  In another recent series of articles Rogers summarizes the LA Critical Mass incident and aftermath, but again phones it in from his apartment, not bothering to make the trip to the public meetings he reports on.

I began reading Rogers’ blog when he had only a handful of readers, but lately I’ve found the content to be off the mark.  In the Bike Kitchen article, he writes “I wasn’t there either night, so I can’t comment on what really happened.”  The entire article is a comment on what happened!  In the same article he asks “are we discouraging the people we need to encourage?”  We?  Rogers has never volunteered for a bike repair collective, nor has he, I believe, been to one as a customer.  He’s not part of the “we”.   In his article on Fisher, he dares the reader to spot Bikeways in the organization chart, then doesn’t bother to show where it is (the Bureau of Capital Programming), and fails to show the reader where Fisher is on the org chart.  Rogers, who has a car and sometimes drives, wrote about the May 28th Critical Mass beatdown “as I write this, cyclists are confronting representatives of the LAPD at tonight’s meeting of the Bike Advisory Committee.”  Close your computer, put the keys in the ignition, and make the trip; go to the meeting.

I’ll be publishing four articles in the next few days criticizing Rogers’ analysis.  In the first article I will analyze DOT to show that Bikeways is not Fisher’s area of responsibility, and dispute the notion that Fisher is a good strategic target.  The second article will be about Fisher’s position on biking, based on my recent conversation with him.  In the third article I will discuss Rogers’ reporting on events he played no part in, such as the negative review of the Bike Kitchen and the Los Angeles Critical Mass incident.  In the fourth article I’ll discuss how LACBC board members and employees amplified the well intentioned opinions of Josef Bray-Ali, manufacturing a false consensus on Fisher.

I called John Fisher and got his comments on the Rogers piece, and I’ve been to a bajillion public meetings involving DOT.  I co-founded the Bikerowave and I’ve talked with volunteers, customers about Rogers’ piece on the Bike Kitchen.  I was not on the May 28th Los Angeles Critical Mass, but I met Chief Beck at the Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting while I assisted cyclists in filling out comment cards, I went to the press conference by Manny Gallegos, I went to the police commission, I arranged multiple interviews of victims by the press, and I was on the phone my whole holiday weekend.  I’m downtown every week.

I was there and Rogers wasn’t.  These are my thoughts on Rogers’ misrepresentations.

(Read more in “Why Org Charts Matter“.)

Critical Mass riders at the BP gas station on Robertson Blvd, protesting the gulf oil spill. (Photo: formalplay on Flickr)

Los Angeles Police Protective League

For Immediate Release

Contact: Eric Rose (805) 624-0572 or Paul Haney (626) 755-4759

Hollywood bike incident statement

LOS ANGELES, May 29, 2010 Today the Los Angeles Police Department notified the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) of an incident that occurred in Hollywood on May 28, 2010 involving LAPD officers and a few bicyclists who were involved in a protest of British Petroleum. In response to a video tape that has surfaced, the LAPD has launched a comprehensive investigation to determine the facts surrounding the events. In response to the incident, LAPPL President Paul M. Weber released the following statement.

The Police Protective League generally withholds comment on actions by police officers until we know all the facts. We only ask that the community refrain from a rush to judgment. It is always important to remember that home video, shot from a distance, from one angle and in the dark, and not at the beginning of the incident seldom tells the whole story.

About the LAPPL Formed in 1923, the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) represents the more than 9,900 dedicated and professional sworn members of the Los Angeles Police Department.

The LAPPL serves to advance the interests of LAPD officers through legislative and legal advocacy, political action and education.

The LAPPL can be found on the Web at www.LAPD.com

Los Angeles Police Protective League
1308 West Eighth Street
Los Angeles, California 90017
phone: (213) 251-4554

On May 28, 2010 around 9:30 PM, LAPD Hollywood Area bike unit officers were patrolling the Entertainment District in Hollywood, at the intersection of Hollywood Boulevard, just east
of Highland Avenue, when a group of bicyclists numbering approximately 400 traveled eastbound on Hollywood Boulevard.

As part of enforcement efforts, LAPD Officers were watching for red light violations, and issuing citations. As Officers attempted to detain several bicyclists, a reported use of force was captured on video.

“In response to what we learned, we immediately launched a full-scale investigation to determine the facts surrounding the events,” said LAPD Assistant Chief Earl Pay singer. “The Departments Professional Standards Bureau has taken the lead in the inquiry and the Police Commission’s Inspector General has also been made fully aware of the matter.”

Since November 2009, the LAPD Office of Operations has worked closely with representatives of the biking community to improve relations, make the streets safer for bicyclists and discuss and identify issues involving bicyclists that are problematic for the motoring public.

“Our Department takes seriously its obligations and commitment to all members of the community. The Chief of Police and I pledged our strong support to work closely with the bike community and that promise has not wavered. It’s our hope that the relationship we’ve developed with the biking community over the past months will be strengthened even more as we continue to work together to find solutions to difficult circumstances such as these.”

LAPD Internal Affairs Group is investigating this reported use of force incident.