We know that more trains, buses, bikes, and feet make for a more sustainable system for everyone to get around (or do we?) So why don’t we invest $1 trillion in these modes (or should we?)
YES! Take the gloves off and fight. From my climate influence perspective, there is storytelling/messaging opportunity in making the anti-mobility folks look like the most irrelevant people on the planet, which *stings* at the human level. It may not be the big policy shift solution that solves the whole issue - BUT if we got louder (better media coverage, for one) about the political leaders who ARE moving ahead with better bike/walk/transit infrastructure and related, it'd begin to nudge the others who want such "fame". This is exactly why I intentionally invited bike-riding mayors/city council people on to my Living Change podcast . The naming and faming stories are so energizing. ANYWAY - thanks for this excellent piece, Sam.
Thanks Michael. Are you a Living Change listener? I so appreciate it, if so - and love the community Sam's Substack posts seem to convene! (thanks Sam!)
Thank you - for city leaders, all of my guests were GREAT, but start with Alex Fisch of Culver City, John Bauters of Emeryville and Mark Gamba of Milwaukie OR. Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Good stuff here. When you’re a policy wonk who reads the work of a lot of policy wonks, it gives a very skewed impression of how many Democrats are on board with intelligent transportation policies.
Tons of older Democrats are literally suburban NIMBYs. Tons of young Democrats who live in cities might be all up to date on culture war issues, but have just uncritically absorbed their parents’ NIMBYism. They might wrap their NIMBYism up in the urban “gentrification” argument, but at the end of the day a lot of them still just wish it were easier to find a parking spot.
An advocacy approach of think-pieces and blogs and well-researched books is a failing plan. Urbanist Youtube has been a godsend for reaching a larger audience, but it’s still a drop in the bucket. Even in San Francisco, I talk to a lot of people who say, “woah, you’re really into this urban planning stuff,” with the implication that it’s a super weird, niche interest.
Then I go to a YIMBY meet up and some of these guys have no idea that San Francisco politics does not utterly revolve around housing. Most voters are truly oblivious about zoning codes and permitting processes—they simply vote for whichever local candidates match their stances on hot-button national issues. And so local elections that should be about housing and transportation get subsumed by irrelevant stances on national issues.
The key is to get involved and build coalitions, if the yimby group is clueless be the connection to other groups woth similar goals in housing and transportation, also get the group to host community events to bring in different perspectives and priorities beyond our personal projects
For sure. Also not to say the groups themselves are clueless, just that lots of people who are on the sidelines of this issue don’t realize how niche the “movement” still is. I think the internet can give the impression that awareness is rising much faster than it actually is.
For sure, I think it is also in the benefit of local orgs to align with other adjacent issues, and we have seen success there with low income housing and rent control measures
The dominating principle is the consumption of space by mobility regardless of the access form. After the financial accountability of rail the public policy has been to finance this expansion resulting in extended infrastructure with less productive density to support it. recall that the "decaying infrastructure" trope started in 1977 (to promote the STA) on the heels of the Interstate construction.
Well said. We are stuck in the ultimate prisoner's dilemma, where we all sort of recognize the need to act, but nobody is willing to flinch or make the first move. I'd love to see my money (taxpayer $) invested in better public transportation and infrastructure not tied to cars, but... well, we know how this ends.
YES! Take the gloves off and fight. From my climate influence perspective, there is storytelling/messaging opportunity in making the anti-mobility folks look like the most irrelevant people on the planet, which *stings* at the human level. It may not be the big policy shift solution that solves the whole issue - BUT if we got louder (better media coverage, for one) about the political leaders who ARE moving ahead with better bike/walk/transit infrastructure and related, it'd begin to nudge the others who want such "fame". This is exactly why I intentionally invited bike-riding mayors/city council people on to my Living Change podcast . The naming and faming stories are so energizing. ANYWAY - thanks for this excellent piece, Sam.
Keep up the great work
Thanks Michael. Are you a Living Change listener? I so appreciate it, if so - and love the community Sam's Substack posts seem to convene! (thanks Sam!)
I've just subscribed to your feed on spotify, can't wait to hear it
Thank you - for city leaders, all of my guests were GREAT, but start with Alex Fisch of Culver City, John Bauters of Emeryville and Mark Gamba of Milwaukie OR. Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Good stuff here. When you’re a policy wonk who reads the work of a lot of policy wonks, it gives a very skewed impression of how many Democrats are on board with intelligent transportation policies.
Tons of older Democrats are literally suburban NIMBYs. Tons of young Democrats who live in cities might be all up to date on culture war issues, but have just uncritically absorbed their parents’ NIMBYism. They might wrap their NIMBYism up in the urban “gentrification” argument, but at the end of the day a lot of them still just wish it were easier to find a parking spot.
An advocacy approach of think-pieces and blogs and well-researched books is a failing plan. Urbanist Youtube has been a godsend for reaching a larger audience, but it’s still a drop in the bucket. Even in San Francisco, I talk to a lot of people who say, “woah, you’re really into this urban planning stuff,” with the implication that it’s a super weird, niche interest.
Then I go to a YIMBY meet up and some of these guys have no idea that San Francisco politics does not utterly revolve around housing. Most voters are truly oblivious about zoning codes and permitting processes—they simply vote for whichever local candidates match their stances on hot-button national issues. And so local elections that should be about housing and transportation get subsumed by irrelevant stances on national issues.
The key is to get involved and build coalitions, if the yimby group is clueless be the connection to other groups woth similar goals in housing and transportation, also get the group to host community events to bring in different perspectives and priorities beyond our personal projects
For sure. Also not to say the groups themselves are clueless, just that lots of people who are on the sidelines of this issue don’t realize how niche the “movement” still is. I think the internet can give the impression that awareness is rising much faster than it actually is.
For sure, I think it is also in the benefit of local orgs to align with other adjacent issues, and we have seen success there with low income housing and rent control measures
Also recent coverage in major publications is helping educate at large
https://www.threads.net/@connorlockca/post/Cvp8_UVymcX/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
The dominating principle is the consumption of space by mobility regardless of the access form. After the financial accountability of rail the public policy has been to finance this expansion resulting in extended infrastructure with less productive density to support it. recall that the "decaying infrastructure" trope started in 1977 (to promote the STA) on the heels of the Interstate construction.
We have to organize and fight for what we want, and we can win
Posting and article writing can only get us so far, we still have to be involved with politics and policy directly
Well said. We are stuck in the ultimate prisoner's dilemma, where we all sort of recognize the need to act, but nobody is willing to flinch or make the first move. I'd love to see my money (taxpayer $) invested in better public transportation and infrastructure not tied to cars, but... well, we know how this ends.
We have to organize and fight for what we want in transportation and housing, we have enough numbers to win in most major cities