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.

New Report on Bike and Ped Funding Concludes: “Not Fair.”

A new report on funding for bicyclists and pedestrians concludes that although 12 percent of all trips in the US are made by bicycle or on foot, the federal government spends just 1.6 percent of its transportation dollars, or $2.17 per capita, on bike and pedestrian infrastructure (like bike lanes and sidewalks)—a mismatch the Cascade Bicycle Club calls patently “not fair.”

Seattle, interestingly, ranked fourth among 51 American cities both in biking and walking rates (third in cycling—behind Portland and Minneapolis—and fifth in walking) and among the lowest numbers of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities. However, we were 33rd on a list of those same cities in our rate of funding for bike and ped infrastructure per capita.

We also ranked in the top third of cities in terms of “mode share” (the number of people who get around on bikes or on foot), safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, policies that benefit cyclists and pedestrians, and advocacy. We ranked in the middle third on funding for bike and ped projects and “safety/encouragement.” Specifically, Seattle was ranked 12th among the 51 cities on safety for cyclists, and sixth among safety for pedestrians.

The study also dings Seattle for not providing enough parking for bikes in public buildings and for not providing adequate bike parking at public events, and credits the city for fining drivers ($124) for failing to yield to bikes, requiring bike parking in new buildings, and—oddly, since Seattle doesn’t have a maximum parking policy—for restricting the number of parking spaces for cars in new developments.

Read the whole report, which includes tons of additional data about cities including Seattle, here.


  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    Seriously, of all the important political news items floating around any given day for the city and state, this? 

    What’s happened to you guys? I know you don’t really give a shit about the comments sections and have let them go to rot, compared to a few years ago, with the strict “we don’t like to moderate” philosophy, but even the numerical volume of posts is way, way down compared to 1-2 years ago. Then we get stuff like this, which is essentially a copy/paste reproduction of the statements from the Cascadia Bike Club.

    Is there nothing more critical that you guys can really dig into and report on? Seriously, what happened? There used to be 5, 10 posts a day of pretty rich content. Look at what you used to do:

    http://publicola.com/archives/ 

    What happened? More of what we had in 2010/early 2011, and less of this infrequently frequent bullshit, please.

  • TaDa

    Study done by Alliance for Biking and Pedestrians – there’s a neutral group.  I understand the nuclear power association just produced a study saying nukes are the best and safest way to go!  And Phillip Morris, I mean 
    Altria Group has proven smoking is good for you.

    Anyway, the study seems to indicate that Seattle is doing a great job.  High mode share, safe and we don’t even need to take all those parking spaces from the 88% that don’t bike or walk to work.  It would appear we should cut spending a little on these modes and improve our streets for all :D

  • jimu

    I don’t see why the federal government should spend any money on bicycle projects. Are we going to have an interstate bicycle path system? Bicycle infrastructure should be funded at the local level. period.

    I’m glad Seattle is at the top in this area. It doesn’t cease to amaze me how many people cycle around here considering the rain and hills.

  • Mikos

    It’s one thing to count trips and it’s another to count miles. If you count miles how does the funding balance out?

  • Monster

    I won.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    Yes, you traveled back in time during the recession leading to them losing several interns and freelance writers. 

  • repete

    Tiresome sophistry. 
    Trips does not equal trip miles. 
    One mile of economy moving road (like getting your Chinese bikes to the
    hipster store) does not cost the same as one mile of bike path.  So, the single conclusion of the 200+ page
    report is kinda weak.  There are plenty
    of good reasons to spend more on bike and ped paths without the BS.  One of those reasons, which cyclists would
    use if they were as smart as they say, is that getting the bikes off the roads
    with the cars, makes traffic move better, and that reduces CO2 emissions also.

  • Monster

    There goes the whispy scifi talk again. more like i changed the
    direction of the conversation on the boards, which in turned changed the
    direction of content.

  • Monster

    but but but 12%%%%%%

  • ivan

    They’re mailing it in, Joe. Reporting real news is hard work, and they’re simply not up to it. 

  • Ctrl+V

    ECB on transportation policy, always good for a laugh, even if she’s just aggregating a CBC talking point.

  • 38% now = 51%

    nothing int he link says we’re walking and biking “more.”

    So, it’s true in the sense that most people live in multifamily is true.
     

  • Kim

    “although 12 percent of all trips in the US are made by bicycle or on foot, the federal government spends just 1.6 percent of its transportation dollars, or $2.17 per capita”

    How about a “per mile” estimate?

  • FrequentPoster

    If the cyclistas want bike paths, they should be pushing for bike license fees. Otherwise, I will vote against any accommodations, and against any politician who spends money on it.

  • Ronbot

    I guess pedestrians should just wait for a gap in traffic and run across I-5.

  • Ronbot

    I would bet that most drivers expect there to be a sidewalk when they park their car, even if they walk feet rather than miles.

  • Ronbot

    How about per injury or fatality?  

  • Anonymous

    You’re a moron.

  • JN

    Following his thought process, FreqPost also believes that pedestrians should pay for sidewalks. If those dang pedestrians want sidewalks, then we should push to license shoes.

  • fount

    I can understand that argument…but the Feds stopped limiting their funding to the interstate system a long time ago. The Mercer construction getting underway — $40 million of that came from the Feds.

    So either we go libertarian and say the Feds can’t spend any money except on highways, or we say they could be doing a bit more on bikes. I could understand either one.

  • The Beatles

    Our lawyers will be calling you soon about infringement. 

  • Blue Light

    Never intended to be.  Participation has declined with credibility.  More people realized the  “journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news” claim was just con-man (and con-women, Erica!) cover for Democratic Party political operatives.  Take Publicola with the same grain as Sightline, et al.

  • james in the CD

    transportation projects in the City are funded by sales tax and federal dollars (federal monies come from lots of tax sources).  

    people who ride bikes pay sales tax and pay into the federal pot – so why do you think they should pay an additional fee to get a service they are already paying for (regardless of the fact that a bike license fee would never cover the costs needed to build the infrastructure).

    i think most of the people like you don’t get that a lot of people riding bikes here in the City is in large part because they really dont have another option.  i live in the CD and work downtown -  we have one car in my two person family – neither of us can afford to pay for parking – and the bus in the CD is not an attractive option for me – therefore i ride my bike to work. 

    ignorant self serving people and corporations like you are the reason America is recessing in so many ways.  but keep on believing that way day if you say stupid shit like this – you too can be like one of them. 

  • Ronbot

    A great job compared to Tulsa? I set my sights a little higher.

  • FrequentPoster

    Pedestrians aren’t allowed on the streets. If cyclistas won’t pay for licenses, then neither should they be allowed on streets. Nor should they be allowed on sidewalks if pedestrians and within 500 feet.

  • FrequentPoster

    Motorists pay sales and gasoline taxes. Why should they pay an additional fee to get a service they are already paying for? Time to end vehicle registration and driver licensing requirements, right?

  • Verd1n

    “Transportation projects … are funded by sales Tax …”  

    I think james needs to get out of grade one.  

    No sales tax revenues go into transportation, period.  Try looking at gas tax receipts for a change.  The, try local special tax revenues such as bond issues backed by property taxes.

  • Mark B

    Why is he a moron? Because he does not agree with you? I myself will vote against anything bicycle until they actually start fixing the roads first (and by fix I mean actual repairs, not painting a bike lane or reducing traffic flow)

  • Mark B

    There are many neighborhoods in Seattle with no sidewalks. I am sure there are more pedestrians than bicyclists and yet they build bike lanes instead of sidewalks.

    Is that “fair”?

  • FrequentPoster

    I agree with that. The “journalists” here, especially Erica Barnett, have absolutely no regard for fact.

  • Mikos

    No sidewalks in my Seattle neighborhood and that’s fine with the neighbors I have talked to. What people want is car speeds reduced not sidewalks which will significantly raise their taxes.  I agree major arterials like Aurora and 145th should have passable sidewalks.  And they don’t. But my original question stands. What does it look like when you compares miles traveled instead of trips?

  • FrequentPoster

    It doesn’t cease to amaze me how many people cycle around here considering the rain and hills

    Yeah, a whole 3% of commuters, a number produced by the cyclista lobby and therefore exaggerated, yet still one-third of what they predicted a decade ago. You must be easy to amaze.

  • FrequentPoster

    I’m a “moron” because I call out the cyclistas and the Smugsters for what they actually are: tiresome, whining, self-righteous, freeloading little bitches who contribute nothing but want everything. Not to put too fine a point on it.

  • Mark B

    You say you ride a bike because you don’t really have another option. What about some of the elderly and handicapped that can not ride a bike everywhere? Do you just lump them in with the people you so arrogantly call ignorant and self serving?

  • FrequentPoster

    Yeah, and because the average cyclista works part-time as a barista and lives behind some bushes along the Burke Gilman trail, they aren’t exactly paying property taxes either.

  • FrequentPoster

    The Seattle Smugsters hate the elderly, especially if they are white and own a house. The handicapped? Invisible, and please stay that way.

  • soaked

    In 2011 SDOT filled more potholes than the previous two years combined.  Get ready to start voting for bicycle infrastructure?

  • JN

    If that is the tack you take, we will never be able to pay for anything besides that. You also don’t seem to understand simple traffic theories such as induced demand: if you reduce lanes, traffic will correspondingly lessen and if you add lanes, traffic will increase, NOT easing congestion. You also seem to ignore the actual topic, which is that bicycling and walking nationwide, including Seattle, is chronically underfunded even to their current levels of usage. Commenters such as FP and others are fond of pointing to the percentage of cyclists, while totally ignoring that cyclists and pedestrians are not even getting the share of the budget that we deserve simply due to the  current numbers, proving that motorists are subsidized by the taxpayer, NOT the other way around. And don’t forget, younger generations are increasingly rejecting the car as their means of transportation, so we should get ahead of the curve by moving more funding towards public transit, walking, and cycling, which are increasingly the preferred choices for the citizens who will be running this country in a few years. And THAT is why FP is a moron, because he totally ignores the facts.

  • JN

    Yes, and there are more pedestrians than motorists, so following your line of thought you would agree with me that we should prioritize sidewalks over roads. BTW, there are not even close to as many bike lanes as sidewalks in the city and what do exist are overwhelmingly painted lines on the street with no grade separation or protection, or Multiple Use Paths like the Burke-Gilman.

  • soaked

    Yeah, but in Seattle there are over 2000 miles of sidewalks in Seattle, and only about 120 miles of bike lanes.  Don’t you think we should advance all modes of transportation?

  • james in the CD

    i actually work as an urban planner you arrogant f$ck.  i have a master degree in urban planning and have worked for local governments in the Sound for the last 6 years.   your assumption that i did not make it pass the first grade is false. 

    i ride a bike to work as i live in this City and i can not afford parking downtown – where do you live?  

    i dont have the time to go into the complex tax system – but do some reasearch and you will find that sales tax collected in the City of Seattle go to fund our road projects along with a lot of other things.  i can not understand how you can call me a liar with such aggression – when you are wrong. 

  • james in the CD

    who are you to make such assumptions?

  • james in the CD

    this makes no sense ? 

    are you assuming i dont think we need infrastructure for elderly and handicapped?   i cannot ascertain as to how you came to this assessment from my comment? 

    but of course we need good sidewalks and public transportation for the handicapped. 

    and better bike riding infrastructure for the elderly – if you ever got away from you computer screen and squeezed your fat ass on a bike (yes – i too can make broad di%k head assumptions) on to a bike – you would see a lot of the people i am riding with in the mornings and after the work day are 60+   – we would be doing them a favor by supporting better bike infrastructure. 

    regardless – your comments on my post really didnt even warrant a response – but now i have wasted my time – so here it is. 

  • FrequentPoster

    Seems like I hit a nerve. But just look at the two cyclistas who bought the farm last summer. One was a barista who was probably texting while cycling, and fell down some stairs as a result. The other, a 20-something sandwich delivery boy on a fixie, riding way too fast for conditions.

    Those are your cyclistas. And when they do stupid things, what do they and their cyclista buddies do? Naturally, they blame cars. And you wonder why we laugh at you people.

  • FrequentPoster

    Oh God save us from the urban planners. Above all, they hate those who pay their salaries, and have an insatiable urge to tell other people how to run their lives. We ought to fire every last one of you. I look around Seattle and can’t see any benefit from anything your crew has ever done. All you do is get in the way.

  • FrequentPoster

    Yep, “better bike riding infrastructure for the elderly.” All 20 of them. Face it, you hate the citizens of the city you pretend to “work” for.

  • james in the CD

    i work as a private consultant.  

  • FrequentPoster

    Oh geez, that’s even worse. Contracts with the city, I suppose. So we get to pay your salary plus profit.

  • Blue Light

    Consultants:  When you are not part of the solution, there’s good money to be made by prolonging the problem.

  • Mark B

    What does that say about the parking rates in our city when someone with a “Masters” degree (sorry for the correction, along with “passed” the first grade) who has worked for local governments the last 6 years can not afford to park downtown?

  • Mark B

    Sorry, I am one of those “handicapped” and can’t ride a bike everywhere so I won’t be seeing you and the rest of the spandex brigade in the mornings or after work.

    And you still sound arrogant.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Scott.McElhiney Redorblack Nigelbottom

    I call BS… I ride and the majority of the people I ride with are 50-70+.  I don’t know what handicaps keep someone from riding a bike, or a trike (I ride both recumbents and road bikes).  Spandex not required… health improving dramatically is a given when you start riding.  If it’s a balance issue… get a recumbent trike, they are a blast.  If it’s not wanting to bend over the handlebars of a road bike, get a dutch style bike or a recumbent (recumbents rule for comfort).  Joint issues are the only handicaps that really inhibit cycling and often a proper fitting solves many of those issues.  I’ve helped several people get back into cycling that thought they couldn’t due to various conditions.  Home ownership has nothing to do with it.  Take your stereotype bigotry elsewhere.

  • FrequentPoster

    I’m glad you like your hobby, but don’t sit there and try to make it mandatory, and don’t ask the rest of us to pay for your toys. And spare us the earnest self-righteousness, because many of us finding it irritating enough that, when given the chance, we vote against your favorite ideas, like Prop. 1. And just wait a couple of years. Your friend, Mayor McDope, will be tossed out on his ass for being a brainless cyclista.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Scott.McElhiney Redorblack Nigelbottom

    One might think you are labeling people in an attempt to stereotype/discredit/demean people rather than address an issue with facts… calling people whiners and self-righteous as you whine and beat your chest in righteous indignation… hmm. 

  • FrequentPoster

    As soon as the cyclistas drop the poor selfish bitch pose and kick in their fair share, I’ll consider it.

  • FrequentPoster

    totally ignoring that cyclists and pedestrians are not even getting the
    share of the budget that we deserve simply due to the  current numbers

    Two suggestions. First, pay your way. See, when you’re a selfish, whining, serlf-righteous freeloader, you don’t get too far. Second, leave your gun at home, ya violent little cyclista punk.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Scott.McElhiney Redorblack Nigelbottom

    Why miles?  Obviously you can go further in a car, and that is part of the problem.  We have a road system subsidizing living further away from where you work because people want to work in the Seattle area, but can live far away, in a vicious cycle of adding more lanes means adding more cars, means more traffic jams, more pollution, more wars for oil.  Commercial vehicles are charged by weight because of the damage they do to the roads… maybe we should also be charging passenger vehicles for the damage they do to the roads, the economy, to the 35-40K people they kill each year in this country.  Maybe a chart of fees based on how many miles x how many tons moved based on gross vehicle weight x amount of space taken up by vehicle x how much petroleum products are consumed doing it.  My bikes would barely be worth collection the fee on, my electric car barely (NEV with short range, light weight, goes slow and tiny), my BMW and Mustang would cost more depending on how much I decide to use them.  Fair right?  A couple of years ago I stopped driving my car to work 20 miles round trip and started biking… the gasoline savings were enormous, but I was still paying insurance and registration and licensing fees on the cars.  Last year I got an electric car for a 6 mile round trip commute and local errands and stopped driving my gas cars almost completely for about 6 months… I only filled my tank up once for a trip to Portland.  Saved a ton of money again on fuel and maintainence but was still paying for the other stuff… I should sell some cars and rent a car/truck for longer trips.  Every job has the proper tool, but we Americans have to have the tool for the most ridiculous scenario we can come up with and then use it for everything and expect everyone else to make it possible for us to continue our insane behaviour.

  • KickAss

     …I don’t know what handicaps keep someone from riding a bike…
    wow.  I want a passport to this magic kingdom where leg amputations, brain damage, diabetes, paralyzation, vets with steel rods in their knees, cancer, osteo problems, parkinsons, ROM issues, crime victims,  and generally PAIN   don’t exist.  I suppose there aren’t doctors or orthotics clinics or physical therapy offices nor gyms in this land either.  

     but meanwhile here in seattle, we’ve got plenty of all of the above.  Yes, bikes are great so long as you can ride them.  Please take your hyperbole or ignorance, whichever it is, elsewhere.

  • JN

    Since FP and others continually cite the number of cyclists as a reason not to fund bicycle infrastructure, why do “handicapped” people get a free ride with all of those fancy little ramps at the corners of sidewalks and the best parking spots? There are much less then 3% of people in this city who are handicapped, so why do we have to install elevators in buildings for them, and expensive lifts on buses? And let’s totally ignore the 97% of able-bodied people. After all, we “whole” people are the majority, and FrequentPoster says that minorities do not belong and should get no consideration whatsoever!

    Doesn’t seem very nice to have that logic turned around on you, does it KickAss?

    (If you didn’t realize it, the first paragraph was meant to illustrate a point. I do not feel any animosity towards handicapped people at all.) 

  • JN

    And you sound narrow-minded, just like the cyclists you presume to judge. WAAAHHH, I need special infrastructure!

    Flip the point of your argument around, and it stabs you in the heart.

  • FrequentPoster

     Eventually the Smugster had to let it out. First it was his carrying a gun while he rides his bike, and now it’s his hatred for the handcapped. Untermenschen, aren’t they JN?

  • JN

    ONCE again, FP shows his complete lack of understanding of an analogy just as he did when I compared the killing ability of a gun to a car, as well as a suggestion to treat cyclists as if they were carrying guns to defend themselves before he attempted to murder one with his “dualie”. Someone didn’t get his high school diploma, apparently.