Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

BikeNerd: Cascade Bicycle Club, Elected Officials Call for Traffic Safety and Courtesy

The Cascade Bicycle Club held a press conference today at the intersection of the Ave and Campus Parkway, within sight of the location of a collision that killed bike delivery man Robert Townsend. Five speakers, including City Council member Tom Rasmussen, King County Council member Joe McDermott, and Seattle Police Department spokesman Sean Whitcomb, called for increased safety and courtesy on Seattle’s roads. In the past two months, three cyclists have died on Seattle streets—two as the result of car-cyclist collisions, and one who crashed on a poorly marked staircase that the city had previously identified as a hazard for cyclists.

The speakers’ podium was set up within sight of a ghost bike left to memorialize Townsend. During the course of the press conference, several passersby stopped to look at the letters and flowers left by Townsend’s friends and family. Behind the array of cameras and microphones set up by the press, around 20 CBC members held up signs saying “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” and “WE CAN DO BETTER.”

Each of the speakers talked passionately about the need to reduce fatal collisions. The CBC’s communications director, M.J. Kelly, said, “I’m speaking as a concerned parent. Every day I bike through this intersection on a family bike with my two sons, and I don’t want my husband to get that phone call.”

When I spoke to Rasmussen at the end of the program, he voiced some of the same concerns I brought up on Tuesday about inflammatory anti-bike rhetoric (e.g., “the war on cars”). “I think we need a truce,” Rasmussen said. “That rhetoric is irresponsible and polarizing. We need to stop giving the finger to each other. We’re all very fragile—people on bikes and in sidewalks are no match for [cars].”

Rasmussen voiced support for the road safety summit proposed by Mayor Mike McGinn, which the CBC announced it would also take part in. Hopefully the summit can come up with some serious proposals. It’s important to have sober reflections on tragedies like the press conference, but the best way to memorialize the victims of the recent collisions is to ensure that similar events don’t happen in the future.

(Ironically, the elected officials caused the event to start late by getting stuck in traffic.)

Judging by the response to my first BikeNerd post on Tuesday about the death of bicyclist Robert Townsend, readers want the bike news. I’m excited to keep doing it big on the cycle beat as BikeNerd. Watch this space for more bike-centric news and opinion.


  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    According to recent surveys, Americans want far, far more transportation dollars spent for walking and bicycling infrastructure.   The variance between what we want, and how dollars are spent is so great as to be absurd!

    For bicycles, Americans want 22% of all transportation funding to go to bicycles…yet the current allocation is a mere 1.5%! That’s not a funding failure…that’s our Leadership not listening.

    I’ve outlined it here:

    http://you-read-it-here-first.com/viewtopic.php?p=5810&sid=b383c2aaa222ebaffb64d30106876998#5810

  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    According to recent surveys, Americans want far, far more transportation dollars spent for walking and bicycling infrastructure.   The variance between what we want, and how dollars are spent is so great as to be absurd!

    For bicycles, Americans want 22% of all transportation funding to go to bicycles…yet the current allocation is a mere 1.5%! That’s not a funding failure…that’s our Leadership not listening.

    I’ve outlined it here:

    http://you-read-it-here-first.com/viewtopic.php?p=5810&sid=b383c2aaa222ebaffb64d30106876998#5810

  • Poop

    I would be interested in seeing what the Cascade Bike Club has done with its members to advise them of the stair case issue. Was the person that reported it to the city a member of the club? did the club know about the issue and do anything to educate it members. AAA does all kinds of motorist education and safety campaigns.

  • Poop

    I would be interested in seeing what the Cascade Bike Club has done with its members to advise them of the stair case issue. Was the person that reported it to the city a member of the club? did the club know about the issue and do anything to educate it members. AAA does all kinds of motorist education and safety campaigns.

  • Grover

    If you really are concerned about safety of bicyclists, then ban bicycles from roads.  It’s pretty simple.

  • Grover

    If you really are concerned about safety of bicyclists, then ban bicycles from roads.  It’s pretty simple.

  • Bark more, wag less

    Will equal enforcement of traffic laws on cyclists and cars be on the table?

  • Bark more, wag less

    Will equal enforcement of traffic laws on cyclists and cars be on the table?

  • Andy

    You mean actually enforcing the speed limit for cars?  One can only hope.

  • Andy

    You mean actually enforcing the speed limit for cars?  One can only hope.

  • Barnes

    You know what would keep bicyclists safe and improve traffic flow? Get bikes out of auto traffic. This “bikes have a right to be everywhere cars are” attitude from the professional bike lobby is killing people, literally. A lot has already been done in places like Portland with the construction of obnoxiously named but well thought out ”green ways” and the idea behind them is sound. They are two very different forms of transportation and they need to very different forms of infrastructure to serve them. Drivers will have to deal with the fact that they’re going to have to pony up some dough to build dedicated bike infrastructure and bicyclists are going to have to deal with the fact they don’t have equal right to all the prime topography. Fighting over space in the same public rights of way is foolish.

  • Jb

    I’m in complete agreement with the head line, it’s imperative that cyclist start riding safely and behaving courteously…

  • Jb

    Indeed…  And my research indicates that Americans want 27% off all transportation funding to go to ponies…  Oh and 26.5% to flying car…  Gheeze…  Nut ball…

  • PJ

    Good to see that we’re all heeding Council member Rasmussen’s advice.

  • Barnes

    Bailo is always good for a chuckle. I like the way he stalks around any bad press for McGinn on the net and then launches into some bizarre Orwellian spin about how it’s actually good press. He’s quickly becoming one of my favorites.

  • Bitten

    Just had an idiot on a fixie ride through a red in front of me eating a sandwich with both hands. Wish I could drive like that.

  • Bitten

    Just had an idiot on a fixie ride through a red in front of me eating a sandwich with both hands. Wish I could drive like that.

  • Anonymous

    Every user of the road breaks the rules at some point, whether intentionally or not. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying. Those of you who want to blame cyclists are missing the point. We need better enforcement across the board, particularly for people who are speeding. But mostly we need improved infrastructure that works better regardless of who’s using it and how, and reduces the occurrence and severity of law-breaking.

  • Big Jim Slade

    Would you support bicyclists being licensed and paying tab fees to build this infrastructure, yes or no?

  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo
  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    But do most Americans feel the same way?
    Resoundingly, yes! In a recent survey by national transportation reform groups (designed
    by Collective Strength and conducted by Harris Interactive), Americans
    clearly indicated that we should be spending more transportation dollars
    on active transportation facilities. Here’s how their responses
    compared to current spending breakdowns:

    http://www.railstotrails.org/ourwork/advocacy/advocacycorner/advocacy_corner_aug_08_natl_polls.html

  • http://publicola.com/author/bikenerd/ PJ

    That idea makes intuitive sense but it’s not necessarily great policy.
    I actually talked about it with Rasmussen this morning—he said the Council had discussed it every once in a while. He cited enforcement as a particular problem—bikes are cheap enough and change hands often enough that they’re much more difficult to track than cars. Creating a regulatory infrastructure to deal with bike licensing would be a huge headache.
    There’s also the fact that the vast majority of bikers in Seattle pay car tab fees because they already own cars and, thus, pay for all the improvements already.
    I’d also like to point out that only 7% of the proposed car tab goes to bike-specific infrastructure. Besides, we all pay for public goods that we don’t necessarily use. I don’t grudge anyone their Social Security or Pell Grants, and roads are the most basic of public goods and services.
    And, aside from that larger point, everyone—especially motorists—benefit from road improvements. $60 bucks may seem like a lot, but it’s not more pricey than a fancy dinner out, say. And it’s much less expensive than legal fees incurred from hitting a bicyclist or fixing an axle that got popped out because you drove through a huge sinkhole.

  • Jb

    Yada, yada, yada…  Well what do yo know… In a recent survey by a group with an agenda their agenda was found to be very popular…

  • Jb

    Yada, yada, yada…  Well what do yo know… In a recent survey by a group with an agenda their agenda was found to be very popular…

  • Jb

    Yada, yada, yada…  Well what do yo know… In a recent survey by a group with an agenda their agenda was found to be very popular…

  • Jb

    Yada, yada, yada…  Well what do yo know… In a recent survey by a group with an agenda their agenda was found to be very popular…

  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    Please don’t hate me (my survey) because I’m (it’s) beautiful.

    http://mediamikes.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/kelly_lebrock1.jpg

  • Big Jim Slade

    “There’s also the fact that the vast majority of bikers in Seattle pay car tab fees because they already own cars and, thus, pay for all the improvements already.”

    To which I reply so what, they’re still using the roads.

    Essentially your argument is that there aren’t enough cyclists to make enough of a tax base to fund this? Then why the hell should we ever spend any money on a tiny fraction of one percent of people who use bikes as a transportation option? Your numbers cut both ways.

    “Besides, we all pay for public goods that we don’t necessarily use. ”

    That’s not the point. Motorcycle enthusiasts don’t have any problem paying gas taxes and fees or licensing themselves. Bicyclists seem to bend over backwards with talky explanations about how they really don’t count or shouldn’t have to pony up when it comes to having some skin in the game. You want to be taken seriously by the 80+% of people using the roads who aren’t on bikes, man up and put your money where your mouth is. It ain’t rocket science, it’s politics, and intuitive sense tends to trump wonky policy statements every time.

  • gohuskies

    Plenty of people do drive like that

  • http://publicola.com/author/bikenerd/ PJ

    Like I said, it would be a nightmare to implement. The overhead of implementing the program would be substantial, and enforcement would be impossible.

  • Barnes

    The “it’s impossible to implement” argument is my favorite. It’s pretty simple really. If you want to bike on non-residential streets in city limits you go and take an exam, pass it and get an operators license. The licensing fees pays the overhead. Then you pay for an annual “bike tab”. Each user gets issued two identical orange, reflective stickers with a unique bar code and serial number.that they must affix to the back of a DOT approved helmet where it is viable from behind. The tab fee pays for dedicated bicycle projects in the city.

  • fount

    Just had a fat man in a big red truck with a Rossi sticker nearly sideswipe me while I was in the bike lane.

    Now that we each have anecdotes about the other side, are we safer?

  • http://publicola.com/author/bikenerd/ PJ

    Or we could ban cars.

  • http://publicola.com/author/bikenerd/ PJ

    (That was a very serious comment.)

  • Jb

    Well it is a beauty…

  • Grover

    The guy in the truck is a lot safer than the guy on a bike.

  • FrequentPoster

    I was recently talking to a retired urban planner for a major city in the Pacific NW. I mentioned that the Cascade Bicycle Club has a big pile of money, and that that it would probably take no more than about $50,000 to put signs at the most dangerous places on the trails.

    I suggested it could be done in just a few months, for maybe $1,000 per sign. Given that the Cascade Bicycle Club’s former director is now a top aide to McGinn, it wouldn’t take a whole lot of fighting to accomplish this, I said. He said that they’d probably want a whole lot of studies, and I said, yeah, but if the mayor really cared about the issue he could just call the head of the public works department into his office and say, “Git ‘er done.”

    My friend, who has several decades of experience, said yes, that could be done. And the city does allow private groups to make contributions. So yes, if Cascade Bicycle Club cared, and if the mayor cared, the signage problem could be solved — and could have been solved.

  • FrequentPoster

    Question: What did the guy from the Cascade Bicycle Club say about riding like a bat out of hell in rush hour traffic on a fixie?

  • FrequentPoster

    He cited enforcement as a particular problem—bikes are cheap enough and
    change hands often enough that they’re much more difficult to track than
    cars. Creating a regulatory infrastructure to deal with bike licensing
    would be a huge headache.

    What bullshit. You give people a sticker. They put it on the frame. And you give them a plate. They attach it to the seat while they are riding. When not riding, they take it with them if they want to. Those numbers have to match. If they don’t match, the bicycle is considered stolen, and confiscated. If it’s determined that it’s just a licensing fraud, then the cyclist pays a $250 fine.

    If the cycle changes hands, the sticker and license transfer with it, as long as the transfer is filed with the city. Which can be done online. This would coincidentally battle theft, because a transfer would need both the sticker and the plate. The plate could easily be removed when the owner wasn’t with the bike, making it much harder for a thief to sell, or even ride, a stolen bike.

    And, aside from that larger point, everyone—especially motorists—benefit
    from road improvements. $60 bucks may seem like a lot, but it’s not
    more pricey than a fancy dinner out, say. And it’s much less expensive
    than legal fees incurred from hitting a bicyclist or fixing an axle that
    got popped out because you drove through a huge sinkhole.

    Your $60 fee will go down in flames. You are completely ignoring the political benefit of a bike license fee. It would demonstrate that cyclists are finally serious about pitching in. But then, you’re not serious. You’re the same old self-entitled children you’ve always been, which is why you’ll lose. Look at your Boy Mayor and his 23% approval rating. That’s your future.

  • FrequentPoster

    The “impossible to implement” argument is a lie engineered by the cyclistas and their political enablers, to justify their freeloading status.

  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    Exactly…they are always going around hating on cars…maybe their members should get off their cubicle seats and go out and inspect each and every foot of bike trails to see if there are other dangers…and to insist on proper signage.

    But wait…Cascade is run by the Velodrome Set who only want to bike in 1.5 ft wide bike lanes next to tractor trailers going 70 mph…why would they care about a mere “bike path”….

  • Bitten

    Yes, the same people who think a bag tax is easy.

  • Silas T. Potter Jr.

    McGinn has nobody left to pander to but his base. Guess he’ll need a job from them in 2012.

  • Anonymous

    You do realize that Smart Growth for America is a Washington DC lobbyist group, they dont even explain their poll results, its a dead link. 

  • Anonymous

    You do realize that Smart Growth for America is a Washington DC lobbyist group, they dont even explain their poll results, its a dead link. 

  • Norge

    We need rules for cyclists that they must follow so drivers can know what to expect from them, i.e., stopping at stop signs, not running red lights, riding in bike lanes — not all over the road or on sidewalks as they see fit, riding on roads with bike lanes or the green ways idea and staying off main arterials (such as 15th NW, Denny Way when there are countless alternatives), not passing drivers (on the right) while they wait for lights to change where there is no bike lane, etc.  Cyclists should post some sort of readable identification on their bike and we should have a number to call to report cyclists breaking the law — just as we have numbers to call to report drivers in the carpool lanes. 

  • Norge

    We need rules for cyclists that they must follow so drivers can know what to expect from them, i.e., stopping at stop signs, not running red lights, riding in bike lanes — not all over the road or on sidewalks as they see fit, riding on roads with bike lanes or the green ways idea and staying off main arterials (such as 15th NW, Denny Way when there are countless alternatives), not passing drivers (on the right) while they wait for lights to change where there is no bike lane, etc.  Cyclists should post some sort of readable identification on their bike and we should have a number to call to report cyclists breaking the law — just as we have numbers to call to report drivers in the carpool lanes. 

  • Norge

    We need rules for cyclists that they must follow so drivers can know what to expect from them, i.e., stopping at stop signs, not running red lights, riding in bike lanes — not all over the road or on sidewalks as they see fit, riding on roads with bike lanes or the green ways idea and staying off main arterials (such as 15th NW, Denny Way when there are countless alternatives), not passing drivers (on the right) while they wait for lights to change where there is no bike lane, etc.  Cyclists should post some sort of readable identification on their bike and we should have a number to call to report cyclists breaking the law — just as we have numbers to call to report drivers in the carpool lanes. 

  • Hipster Douchebag

    CBC does a ton of bike safety education stuff.

  • Hipster Douchebag

    Yep, and that cars start signalling and obeying the speed limit and staying the hell out of my bike lane. Glad we’re in agrement.

    (In all seriousness, your comment is really pointless and adds nothing to the discussion. Yes, some bicyclists behave badly. Duh. What else is new. Yes, all road users should obey the law and be courteous. Also duh.)

  • Hipster Douchebag

    Yep, and that cars start signalling and obeying the speed limit and staying the hell out of my bike lane. Glad we’re in agrement.

    (In all seriousness, your comment is really pointless and adds nothing to the discussion. Yes, some bicyclists behave badly. Duh. What else is new. Yes, all road users should obey the law and be courteous. Also duh.)

  • David Robinson

    No, we don’t need those things. It is legal and sensible for cyclists to ride on the road or on sidewalks “as they see fit,” which means that motorists should learn to deal with that — motorists who know and obey the law and are competent to drive and not busy on their phones.And why should cyclists take roundabout ways to their destinations? No, I think i will go the direct way, legally, and the cars will have to slow down some. Yes, *YOU* will have to slow down, whether you like it or not, and look where you are going, while I use the road that I helped pay for.

    Thank you. That’s much better.

  • David Robinson

    No, we don’t need those things. It is legal and sensible for cyclists to ride on the road or on sidewalks “as they see fit,” which means that motorists should learn to deal with that — motorists who know and obey the law and are competent to drive and not busy on their phones.And why should cyclists take roundabout ways to their destinations? No, I think i will go the direct way, legally, and the cars will have to slow down some. Yes, *YOU* will have to slow down, whether you like it or not, and look where you are going, while I use the road that I helped pay for.

    Thank you. That’s much better.

  • Norge

    Why is it that cyclists don’t want to adhere to the rules of the road?  Is it your rebellious nature?  Well I’ve got one too and its just the opposite of yours. 

  • A Million vs. a Handful

    Front page of NY Times today: States can now opt out of spending a way-outsized amount of federal highway funds on bike trails. It seems taking millions from roadways that support a hundred thousand or more per day to support 50 on bicycles ticked off a whole lot of senators.

  • Nobody’s Fool

     ”Greenways” are a disaster for the overall transportation grid. Artificially moving vehicle onto alternate routes doesn’t work. If you like what they did in Portland, it’s only because you do not have the whole picture of it.

  • Nobody’s Fool

     ”Greenways” are a disaster for the overall transportation grid. Artificially moving vehicle onto alternate routes doesn’t work. If you like what they did in Portland, it’s only because you do not have the whole picture of it.

  • David Robinson

    You don’t seem to know what the laws actually are, so your rules must be made up.

  • David Robinson

    You don’t seem to know what the laws actually are, so your rules must be made up.

  • FrequentPoster

    the cars will have to slow down some

    No, they won’t. The bikes will have to watch out some. Remember: Two tons of steel beats 25 pounds of aluminum each and every time.

  • Barnes

    Not if you construct green ways on roads not used by cars as arterials. Their speed and size allows for what would otherwise be side streets to be used as thoroughfares.

  • Anonymous

    What is it with the hatred of people who walk or ride bikes (or take public transit) by so may people?  Why wouldn’t people want more livable communities where we don’t have to rely so much on cars to get around?  You people are mean and mean people suck, therefor, you all suck.

  • boisterousgirlygirl

    FrequentPoster posts frequently. He is a poster child of the frequent poster movement. Hooray FrequentPoster. I looooooooooooove you. FrequentPoster. Yeah!

  • FrequentPoster

    Al, we don’t hate everybody. Just you.

  • FrequentPoster

    Al, we don’t hate everybody. Just you.