All posts in the topic Major Incident at Critical Mass bike rally (Short link)
Summary
- There are 88 posts — by 41 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Mark V Anderson at 2007 Sep 12 02:30 UTC
I just spoke with my brother via cell phone, apparently there has been a major
incident at the Critical Mass bike rally, where a large group of bike riders,
100 to 200 strong, rides the city streets. This incident seems to have been
sparked when a biker strayed across the yellow line and the police arrested
him. I don't know the details yet, but there were dozens of police involved,
people were maced, cuffed, and force was used to subdue individuals, and there
were apparently several arrests. It seems there were some anarchists in the
crowd, and the police may have been provoked, and there was a large
overreaction in both the crowd and by the police. This is extremely
unfortunate.
I think the city government needs to react to this immediately. Up until now
Critical Mass has largely been free of incidents and has gone on for many years
peacefully. I have only been a bystander to these events and always found them
amusing, and good natured as the bikers take an equal footing to automobiles on
our city streets. These types of events happen frequently in the biking
community, and there is the potential for long term escalation if steps are not
taken to diffuse the situation due to the nature of the incident.
If there are policy makers reading this, or members of the Peace Community, now
would be a good time to step in and try to defuse the situation. At the next
critical mass event, it would be good to see members of the peace community
there, as well as people who can negotiate with the police in order to deal
with disturbances, and to avoid misunderstandings. The last thing Minneapolis
needs at this point is a Seattle style riot in the lead up to the GOP
convention, and this has all the earmarks for creating an environment that is
going to bring out a severe backlash. Also our police are overworked, working
60 hour weeks in some cases. We don't need to waste our resources on this.
Peter, I agree with your comments. I am very upset about what happened at Critical Mass. I don't know everything that did occur and I'm not going to point fingers at the bikers or police, but this should be a peaceful event. From what I witnessed and photographed, several people had red faces from being maced, and there were many upset bikers -- yelling in rage and crying in fear near the SuperAmerica in Loring Park. A police officer at Groveland and LaSalle in squad #530 (maybe #540) was using their announcement system to demand that the group of bikers split up, or they would be arrested. A group of marching MPD and HCSO officers followed the group, some with mace in-hand. On the 2400-block of Nicollet, several bikers were being searched and arrested. I've heard other rumors, which I am hesitant to repeat, but they ranged from police officers being assaulted by bikers and police officers hitting bikers with their squad cars. Of course, I don't know what's true. Photos at http://flickr.com/photos/diversey/sets/72157601796064051/ I would love to hear from others at the event and learn what happened. This can and should always be a peaceful rally in support of bicycling. Tony Webster University
This is very discouraging and unfortunate. I am looking into what went wrong and will continue to do so and welcome any accounts or observations on or off list. I will also plan on joining the ride again next month and will encourage other policy makers and peace activists to do so as well as Peter wisely suggests. Cam Gordon 612 296-0579 > To: <email obscured>> From: <email obscured>> Subject: [Mpls] Major Incident at Critical Mass bike rally> Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 13:51:03 +1200> > I just spoke with my brother via cell phone, apparently there has been a major incident at the Critical Mass bike rally, where a large group of bike riders, 100 to 200 strong, rides the city streets. This incident seems to have been sparked when a biker strayed across the yellow line and the police arrested him. I don't know the details yet, but there were dozens of police involved, people were maced, cuffed, and force was used to subdue individuals, and there were apparently several arrests. It seems there were some anarchists in the crowd, and the police may have been provoked, and there was a large overreaction in both the crowd and by the police. This is extremely unfortunate.> > I think the city government needs to react to this immediately. Up until now Critical Mass has largely been free of incidents and has gone on for many years peacefully. I have only been a bystander to these events and always found them amusing, and good natured as the bikers take an equal footing to automobiles on our city streets. These types of events happen frequently in the biking community, and there is the potential for long term escalation if steps are not taken to diffuse the situation due to the nature of the incident.> > If there are policy makers reading this, or members of the Peace Community, now would be a good time to step in and try to defuse the situation. At the next critical mass event, it would be good to see members of the peace community there, as well as people who can negotiate with the police in order to deal with disturbances, and to avoid misunderstandings. The last thing Minneapolis needs at this point is a Seattle style riot in the lead up to the GOP convention, and this has all the earmarks for creating an environment that is going to bring out a severe backlash. Also our police are overworked, working 60 hour weeks in some cases. We don't need to waste our resources on this.> > Peter Vevang> NE, Minneapolis> Info about Peter Vevang: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/petervevang> > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4toa7s8VdeZKCkvRsQ5Vgp>
At 12:50 PM 9/1/2007, Cam Gordon wrote:
>This is very discouraging and unfortunate. I am looking into what
>went wrong and will continue to do so and welcome any accounts or
>observations on or off list. I will also plan on joining the ride
>again next month and will encourage other policy makers and peace
>activists to do so as well as Peter wisely suggests.
Fascinating response, Cam. I appreciate the fact that you're
supporting Critical Mass, but isn't CM, in fact, a "group of 25 or
more who have gathered to express a viewpoint or opinion"? As such,
wouldn't the ordinance you're supporting require them to have a
permit to ride every month? (Presumably there would have to be a
different permit each month, but I'm not certain - please clarify).
If I'm incorrect, and you're not supporting the ordinance proposed by
the Orwellian named "Free Speech Working Group" then please correct me.
If not - please reconcile how you can support that ordinance and
still support the Critical Mass ride.
Jim McGuire
Como
Good points Jim.
And this Free Speech Working Group? I thought our Constitution already covered
free speech.
The fact that it is deemed necessary to create a group to restrict our rights
to free speech and assembly is truly Orwellian.
Over the years in working on Decriminalization of Homelessness,I have been
struck by the lack of concern by our City Council members, and Mayor, regarding
constitutional rights.along with their basic lack of knowledge or understanding
of these rights.
I also got a good education regarding the back room conversations that take
place among the above to sort out who has the most clout on the council, i.e.
money, connections and influence....usually resulting in disservice to our
community and...yes to our homeless residents.It is sad that the little bit of
power gained by being in the city council, leads to way too much selling out.
The city council and mayor should be championing the rights of free speech and
assembly...not toadying to wealthy interests.
But to paraphrase Wizard (whom I respect very much)..I continue to try to push
that huge boulder up a very large hill.
Kingfield
In response to Jim and Margaret's posts: You've both received misinformation (or possibly disinformation) on the proposed "protest permit" ordinance. Cam DOES NOT support the ordinance and never has. In fact, when he and 10th Ward CM Ralph Remington heard of the idea's existence, they made sure it would come to the Free Speech Work Group (the group Cam pushed to form to deal with exactly these sorts of pre-RNC issues) to be vetted. At that meeting, Cam, Ralph and the representatives of the ACLU and other pro-free speech groups (whom Cam included on the group from the outset) and representatives of protest organizations (whom Cam informed of the meeting's time and location) gave the unified message that the proposal is unnecessary, will have dire consequences (much like what happened yesterday) and is likely unconstitutional. See a fuller outline of this issue on Cam's blog: http://secondward.blogspot.com/2007/08/proposed-ordinance-to-license-protests.html#links The Free Speech Work Group isn't Orwellian, it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do: intervene when bad ideas like the "protest permit" ordinance come up, try to shoot them down or mold them into something constructive and constitutional (such as a voluntary registration system, with no requirements and no penalties). Without it, these sorts of ideas would go straight to the Council, with no input from civil liberties groups or CMs on the side of protecting civil liberties. In fact, I would argue that cynically labeling it "Orwellian" does those of us who want to protect civil liberties next year a grave disservice. If it was set up as some sort of Bush-like "clean skies" initiative, then there's no point in engaging with it or organizing around it. If, on the other hand, it was pushed for by a civil libertarian Council Member at the suggestion of civil libertarian constituents, is the locus of real work and debate, and constitutes a possible lever we can use to protect constitutional rights next year, then it demands work, organizing, showing up. One of those assumptions will lead Minneapolis in a positive direction. On to the incident at Friday's Critical Mass. Cam has been a vocal supporter of Critical Mass since before he was elected. He hired a frequent Critical Mass participant as his Aide. When the MPD and Hennepin County Sheriff's office pulled a similar stunt (albeit seemingly less well-coordinated than yesterday's), I was there. Cam empowered me to give my firsthand account on this list and elsewhere of the event. To my knowledge, we were the only Council office to make any public response, and one of two (with CM Gary Schiff) to ride in the next Mass. Our office took some heat for that, from within the MPD, including a veiled reprimand that Cam "needs to control his staff better" from the Sheriff's office and a note from an MPD administration higher-up stating that my message to this list was "bad for Police-Council relations." With all due respect, it is the MPD and the Sheriff's Office who need to better control their staff, and nothing is worse for the relationship between the MPD and at least one Council office than events like this. More on this later. Robin Garwood Cooper Aide to Council Member Cam Gordon
A council member out there blocking traffic with these folks? (including those,
apparently,?trying to obstruct police officers)
I think that itself is very discouraging and unfortunate.
I'm sure there are more details to follow, but what is done to make sure these
people are obeying the rules of the road and not: (a)?harassing the police
officers trying to do their job; and (b)?completely disrupting/disrespecting
traffic and motorists trying to get where they are going?
Anthony Thompson
Standish
So what happened Friday night? The report in Strib reads like something
that was phoned in after a phone conversation with the police. Strib
writer, Joy Powel, apparently didn't even try to talk to any of the
participants or anybody other than the police about what happened. It
is times like this that I'm really grateful for this list. We can
continue to hope that some of the media folks in town start trying to
tell more than one side of the story when 'reporting.'
So, what happened Friday night? The report in the Strib http://www.startribune.com/467/story/1396202.html reads like something that was phoned in after a phone conversation with the police. Strib writer, Joy Powel, apparently didn't even try to talk to any of the participants or anybody other than the police about what happened. It is times like this that I'm really grateful for this list. We can continue to hope that some of the media folks in town start trying to tell more than one side of the story when 'reporting.'
Do we know what the first bicyclist did to get arrested?? Do we know how many
of those arrested are regulars at CM?
Hugh Gitlin
Highland Park
Yes, what is the use of a newspaper like the Star Tribune that just repeats
the one side's press statement. I was part of a legal team that interviewed
the 14 people still in jail this morning from critical mass. The accounts
of the event were very consistent and have no resemblence to the police
account. All of the people were attacked and arrested by police either
randomly or for merely observing with concern others who were attacked by
police for no reason. At least one person arrested was a complete bystander
not even participating in the event. All are credible and have clean
records. We also have statements from over 20 witnesses corroborating that
this incident was completely an act of police aggression. I don't know if
the press will ever report the real story, but it should come out in court.
Jordan S. Kushner
Golden Valley
Robin Garwood: "Our office took some heat for that, from within the MPD,
including a veiled reprimand that Cam "needs to control his staff better" from
the Sheriff's office and a note from an MPD administration higher-up stating
that my message to this list was "bad for Police-Council relations."
This really concerns me, (as well as the Critical Mass incident last night). Do
these messages originate with the Sheriff and the Chief of Police? I realize
that we do not have an open, democratic society any more--if we ever did. But I
read these messages as threats from the Sheriff and Chief of Police to a City
Council Member. Very, very bad news.
WMarks, Central
Jordan,
What you mean <gasp> that the police would lie and those bastions of freedom of
the press at the corporate Star Tribune would simply uncritically repeat those
lies? While ensuring that those possible victims of police brutality be shut
out? Almost reminds one of the media repeating another lie about weapons of
mass destruction.
Why, I am shocked, shocked I tell you. Although the Strib is much too busy
reporting on critical issues such as sidewalks v's no sidewalks in the suburbs.
You would almost swear that the media in this town (and nationwide) was so
corrpted by corporate influence that they would be deemed trustworthy as a
source of information to the public.
Next you will tell me that the media which flat out refuses to inform the
public on events critical to us all is the biggest threat to democracy we all
face.
Thanks "reporters" of the Star Tribune, WCCO, KSTP and all those other
corporate media types. Why without your gallant work, the public may remain
ignorant of the world we live in.
Fortunately, some of us do know already that the corporate media is not even
close to being trustworthy for information, quite the opposite. That is why I
put the Twin Cities Indy media article out there right away.
Michael Cavlan
Powderhorn
And I for one appreciate it Michael. Anyway, for what it is worth, I
plan to show up for next month's Critical Mass ride. I hope word will
get out if one happens sooner than the usual date. Regardless of how
this started, the followup by police afterwards as evidenced by film
footage was excessive and inexcusable.
Peace;
Jessi (Jessica Wicks)
Sheridan, NE Mpls
Jessi,
Thanks and I really appreciate Twin Cities Indy Media also. I shall also be
showing up for the next Crit Mass and I have never been before. See you there.
Michael Cavlan
Powderhorn
Like most of the general public I learned of the Friday night Critical Mass
incident through the blue-tinted lenses of the local evening news. I was
concerned about what went down because I am a supporter of Critical Mass and
know many of its participants and supporters. I have also lived in Minneapolis
for 36 years and know all too well the problems of urban traffic congestion
that Critical Mass protest against. I have also considered myself an anarchist
since I was old enough to know what the word actually meant: a world without
exploitation and borders. Minneapolis Police Department claims that it was
anarchist "provocateurs" that incited the "riot" on Friday night, and this is a
totally familiar story to me. I wasn't surprised to watch local news anchors
repeating this claim pretty much word for word.
Thanks to independent media sources a different picture of what went down is
starting to take shape. Unfortunately it is an all too familiar repeat of a
worn out and poorly directed scene. One overzealous police officer makes a
violent arrest, then calls in "Officer Needs Assistance" as soon as someone
raises their voice in protest. The cavalry responds by charging the crowd with
their vehicles, swinging nightsticks, and dousing anyone with pepper spray who
won't leave the area quickly enough. Anyone looking like a criminal (or
anarchist) is arrested, usually young folks in their late teens or early 20s.
Not actually having committed any crime, those arrested are charged with
generic crimes like Disorderly Conduct and Suspicion of Rioting, evidence of
which the police can fabricate later. In this case nearly 50 cops responded,
including brown shirts from the Hennepin County Sheriff Department and the MN
State Troopers' helicopter (aka "the ghetto bird").
Thinking back I have witnessed this same thing over and over again as far back
as the mid-1980's. This was when the MPD attacked a non-violent anarchist "War
Chest" march in downtown Minneapolis, protesting against corporations that
profit from military hardware. The police claimed on the news that the
anarchists had used chemical agents against them. Quite to the contrary,
earlier that day I had witnessed one group of extremely panicked cops spraying
their fellow officers with mace at point blank range. The news reports also
failed to mention the incident occurred just after a crowd of night-stick
wielding cops attacked the march on the former Federal Reserve Bank Plaza. This
was the first of many times to come where what I witnessed with my own eyes was
very different from what the cops said happened (and was reported by the local
news).
I can think of many other incidents where the Minneapolis cops have broken up
events and similarly over-reacted, too often blaming the "anarchists" for
causing the trouble the first place. In 1994 they attacked the "Freaks' Street
Fair," a legal and permitted event in South Minneapolis, brutally arresting
several teenagers. Eyewitness at that event stated that the police attacked
without warning or provocation. What was intended as a fun, community-oriented,
informational and totally legal event, was shut down by police violence. A year
later a small afternoon bar-b-q was also violently broken up by police in front
of the offices of anarchist magazine Profane Existence, resulting in five
arrests but no charges filed.
In 1997 over one hundred riot police attacked concertgoers attending an
underground anarchist-punk concert at the Bomb Shelter. The riot police were
already assembled in downtown Minneapolis (for security at the Hennepin Block
Party) and raced to the scene after an Officer Needs Assistance call was put
in. That night the police brutally (and randomly) arrested 11 people, beat
dozens more with four foot truncheons, and covered nearly all 150 or so
attendees with pepper spray. They excused their actions by saying that the
police were attacked and pointed out that one of their own, Charlie Storlie had
received a broken arm in the incident. It was later revealed (and documented
on videotape) that police had provoked the incident by spraying the crowded
venue with chemical Mace. Eyewitnesses from nearby businesses also reported
that officer Storlie tripped over an MTC bus bench just outside the Bomb
Shelter entrance, causing his own broken arm. (Storlie gained further notoriety
in 2003 for unloading an M-5 submachine gun into fellow MPD Officer Duy Ngo).
My own involvement in anarchist-alinged projects like Profane Existence, the
Emma Center, Anti-Racist Action, etc. have often resulted in harassment by
local law enforcement. Over the last two decades, myself, my friends, and my
family have been subjected to all kinds of demeaning acts and intimidation
tactics. This has included midnight visits from the MPD, shining their squad
car spotlights into the windows of my home, and taunting threats over their
loudspeakers. I witnessed a friend co-editor of Profane Existence magazine
being seized by the hair by an officer driving a Minneapolis Police squad car
down and dragged a good distance down an alley (this same friend later earned a
PhD in Political Science from the U of M). Once I was even taken from my home
in the middle of the night, without warrant and at gunpoint, for an impromptu
ally side interrogation by the Minneapolis Police. I have been subjected to
humiliating (and illegal) searches, sprayed with all kinds of chemical agents,
and have been have on more than one occasion been beaten by police officers
while in handcuffs. The first time this happened I was beaten by cops in front
of the Super America gas station on Bryant Avenue South and West Lake Street.
While one cop was beating me the other announced to the crowd, "This is your
tax dollars at work" over their squad car's PA system. They then drove me in
the quad car and joked about "taking me to the river." I was eventually dropped
off at Juvenile Detention, but not arrested or charged with any crime. The
people there called my parents and told me I was lucky that I wasn't beaten up
worse. I was 16 when this happened the first time. Keep in mind I have never
once been convicted of a crime beyond a simple traffic ticket. Yet have
routinely been treated like a criminal because of my stated distaste for the
current social-economic system. Even though I am very white I feel I have had a
taste of what discrimination is like, and I feel strong solidarity for other
minority communities who are too often treated as a "criminal class."
This latest incident shows the Minneapolis Police's lack of restraint and
common sense, charging in like rabid bulls when a skinny little black-clad
teenager fails to respect their authority. In the meantime violent crimes are
rampant throughout the city and entire neighborhoods are under the siege of
poverty, prostitution and open drug dealing. The presence of über fanatical
Hennepin County Sheriff's deputies and State Trooper brown shirts will
certainly not help to diffuse the situation either (throwing more state and
country cops at the problem is the typical "Minnesota Nice" way of putting a
band-aid over a problem, instead of solving the the inequity that causes them).
As the RNC draws nearer, I can only see this kind of harassment and
heavy-handedness by local, county and state police increasing. We have recently
been shown the ineptitude of our unelected state and local government officials
in everything from infrastructure maintenance to driving skills. I can only
predict things will get far worse in the next year.
As for the local news reporting, it is as disturbing as it is predictable that
the major news outlets would cover the story entirely from the official police
perspective. This one dimensional reporting only helps the the police cast the
Critical Mass riders as anarchist criminal and not legitimate protesters
exercising their right to free speech (not to mention their right of way). Even
though I risk further police harassment and abuse for speaking up, I vow that I
will be on the streets with camera in hand, to help document police actions at
future Critical Mass rides and other "anarchist" events in coming months. I
will share my information with other independent media outlets and local web
sites. I congratulate others who have already spoken up and uncovered the
obvious official hypocrisies and lies surrounding the events of Friday night.
We are not criminals and should not tolerate being treated as such. Stay
independent. Stay free.
Daniel Siskind
Editor, Profane Existence Magazine
I keep hearing complaints about the media reporting
only the police version of this incident but, so far,
no one has given any other version. Any number of
people here claim to know people involved in the ride
so, tell us, what actually happened?
Is it any wonder that trouble ensues when a group of
bicyclists set out deliberately to obstruct traffic?
I'm all for increasing bicycle usage but I question
the tactics of the Critical Mass people. I haven't
seen the Minneapolis group but I have witnessed CM in
the San Francisco Bay area. There, they were
aggressively obnoxious given to shouting obscenities
at elderly people caught in their pack.
So, please, how about a factual account of what
actually occurred Friday night. Why was the first
rider arrested and what did the rest of the arrestees
do, if anything?
Incidentally, there are some interesting videos of
various CM incidents on YouTube.
Charlie said:
> I keep hearing complaints about the media reporting
> only the police version of this incident but, so far,
> no one has given any other version. Any number of
> people here claim to know people involved in the ride
> so, tell us, what actually happened?
I agree - what we have so far amounts to a series of statements posted
sequentially at indymedia which do not add up to a bigger picture. They
are more like rumors than anything - one unsubstantiated factoid following
another.
I am very sympathetic to CM for many reasons. One is that I find it
highly unlikely that this show of force was necessary, especially with a
multi-year track record without violence on the part of CM. I have also
been wary of Minneapolis police for years, and wondered what it would take
for the white middle class to finally "get" what people of color have been
saying for years. Perhaps this is it. But I do not want to jump on this
issue until I know for sure.
I would like a detailed account that reads more like a news report. It's
been a few days, so I would hope this has settled out some and we can get
the "real" story (not the the police blotter bit that wound up in the
Strib.
Thank you, Daniel, for an excellent post with a great history lesson
from a perspective that is not heard often enough.
In terms of the media, as you said it was terrible but not
surprising. It's such a well-worn groove that I'm only surprised
when a journalist strays from it. I sent the following to Joy
Powell, the Strib reporter who wrote what was probably the worst
piece (not that it will do any good, mind you). It is beyond
laziness to simply report the cop version of these events. It is a
means of perpetuating the very system these precious young people
were protesting against and is the ultimate form of bias:
Dear Ms. Powell:
As an individual who visited Critical Mass arrestees in the jail,
observed their injuries and watched large amounts of video footage of
the incident that resulted in the arrest of 19 individuals and the
injury and violations of rights of many more, I must protest that
your coverage in today's Star Tribune article ("19 bicyclists
arrested after rally turns into melee") was biased and factually
incorrect. It is clear from video images that not only did the
Critical Mass participants remain peaceful and lawful throughout the
entire incident, but that police acted improperly at many points
during the incident. Specific improper conduct includes shoving
bicyclists from behind who were attempting to leave the area, tasing
people after they were in handcuffs and face down on the pavement,
spraying chemical irritant into the crowd at random and without
cause, and singling out individuals with cameras for attack and
arrest. Despite this bad conduct by police, at no time did the crowd
surround the police or incite them, as stated in your
article. Further, it was clear from the presence of a state trooper
helicopter even before the event started that police had planned in
advance to attack this event.
I realize that police give themselves a strategic advantage by
reporting their version of reality to the media quickly, while the
recipients of their conduct are busy securing lawyers, posting bail
and attending to their injuries. However, as a journalist your job
should be to ferret out truth rather than simply rework a press
release from the cops.
Michelle Gross, Vice President
Communities United Against Police Brutality
Minneapolis, MN
I was a member within the crowd, and I'm almost hesistant to post anything in
case the police come to arrest me for blocking traffic. Something a lot of
people, including the police, have glossed over is the fact that it's really
hard to maneuver on a bike within a tight crowd, let alone a panicked one. My
friend fell off her bike and got sprayed in the mouth, and I could feel gas
entering my sinuses. Neither of us exchanged a word with any policeman and
were only sticking around to help out a guy we knew who had just gotten sprayed
in the eyes by getting him water. I have only my mountain biking balance
skills to thank for escaping untouched. That's just one person's account
amongst 200. Maybe I shouldn't have joined the event, but it seemed legitiment
to me- many higher ups from the city have been part of CM and I never
considered it remotely threatening.
Here are some of those YouTube links referenced in an earlier post:
So, let me see if I understand this.
A lawless mob of 400 bicycles (by one report) assembles
with the intent of roaming throughout the city and
disrupting rush-hour traffic. This mob has a history
of minor altercations with the police, both locally and
nationally. And then, some participants are shocked,
simply shocked, when another run-in with the authorities
ensues.
Did I miss something?
It seems pretty clear that the Minneapolis Critical Mass
gathering is lawless, in the sense that it flagrantly,
even aggressively, ignores numerous laws, particularly
those relating to traffic. Things like stopping for
stop lights, stopping for stop signs, and from personal
experience, yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk.
Never mind accusations that some riders were seen trying
to provoke drivers.
It also appears that the Critical Mass gathering is a mob,
in the sense that it derives a feeling of power from its
numbers. This feeling of power enables it to engage in
behaviors that participants wouldn't think of doing as
individuals (e.g., aggressively disrupting rush-hour
traffic, allegedly trying to provoke drivers,
allegedly trying to "rescue" someone from police
arrest).
The intent of the Critical Mass mob (presuming for a
moment that mobs can have intent) is pretty clearly
to disrupt rush-hour traffic. Obviously, the event
is scheduled for Friday rush hour. And, corking
(circling and blocking traffic to keep the mob
together) appears intended to increase the disruption
of rush-hour traffic.
I am sure that if a similar mob was riding something
less politically correct than bicycles (let's say
a mob of 400 motorcycles aggressively disrupting
rush hour traffic and blatantly ignoring traffic)
the whole city would demand that the authorities
crack down. Probably even demand the governor call
out the national guard, or call the national guard
back from Iraq, or whatever governors do these days.
Having said all that, I am in no way justifying the
police response, in large part because I don't know
what really happened. Rather, I think we all need to be
concerned about the abuse of power and about those who
feel that they can pick and choose which laws they wish
to obey, whether these people are police officers,
elected officials, other government employees and
officials, or lawless mobs (even those on bicycles).
There have been a couple of requests for a more factual report on Friday's Critical Mass from the perspective of CM. The best report I've seen was on Steve Marsh's blog - http://stephenhero.wordpress.com/2007/09/02/blood-on-the-tracks/ As has been stated before - Critical Mass rides have been going on for some time without incident. Why was there suddenly a need for the police to tail the ride with a helicopter? (The silliest answer I've seen was someone who said it's because we have a bridge out). Clearly, the real difference is that this ride included people here from the "<http://www.rncwelcomingcommittee.org/prenc-labor-day-2007/>pReNC" - as Steve points out in his blog entry. Jim McGurie Como
"I'd like to point out--bicyclists don't obstruct
traffic, they are part of the traffic."
That's true of bicyclists but is it true of Critical
Mass? Is the following "obstruction" or just being
"part of the traffic?"
> There have been a couple of requests for a more factual report on > Friday's Critical Mass from the perspective of CM. The best report > I've seen was on Steve Marsh's blog - > http://stephenhero.wordpress.com/2007/09/02/blood-on-the-tracks/ Thank you, Jim. This confirms the real problem here. I want everyone associated with Critical Mass to consider for a moment that they are in danger of being hijacked by a group of people who intend to promote violence. They do not care about CM, they want to use the organization. They are attempting to get you riled up so that you will fight the police alongside them. Did the cops over-react? I'm rather certain that they did. But you can see from Steve Marsh that they had advanced warning and expected trouble? Can you understand how the people who wanted trouble may have even been the tipsters? DO NOT BE DUPED! This is all about getting otherwise quiet people hooked into a movement they would otherwise have no reason to be involved in. Yes, there is a conflict with the cops. It needs to be resolved. But don't get in their faces about this - approach them quietly and forcefully, and demand an apology and all charges be dropped. Let them know that you will not tolerate people using your organization for their own unrelated violent goals, and the cops will make peace with you. I realize many of you are very mad right now. You are supposed to be mad. It's like the people that listen to Hate Radio - they goal is have them stirred up. Are you stirred up? Angry? Ready for action? Well, someone wants you to be that way. Do you know who that is? Steve Marsh wrote about it. Understand who the real enemy is here. Keep your eyes on the prize - safer streets for bicyclists. Don't let the cause be hijacked.
In a message dated 9/3/2007 12:09:19 P.M. Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: "I'd like to point out--bicyclists don't obstruct traffic, they are part of the traffic." That's true of bicyclists but is it true of Critical Mass? Is the following "obstruction" or just being "part of the traffic?" Of course CM is violating traffic law: _http://www.pdwebworks.com/tcbc/tips/bt-mn_bike_laws.html_ (http://www.pdwebworks.com/tcbc/tips/bt-mn_bike_laws.html) That link is the section on bicycling laws in Minnesota. For those who don't want to hit that link, CM is violating section 169.222 subsection 4 parts a & c. Part a specifies that bicycles should ride to the right (with exceptions for passing, left turns, or holes, debris and other things that make riding to the right hazardous. Part c says bicyclist should not ride more that 2 abreast, not impede reasonable flow of traffic, and if a laned road, do not take up more than one lane. Were the police right for beating people, probably not. But to say that CM was minding their own business, that is wrong and it is wrong every month.
I gave another version from the source Twin Cities Indy Media because I KNEW
that all the corporate media like Star Tribune, WCCO, KSTP etc would give only
the police version.
There are other sources for information that the discredited corporate media.
You just have to turn your TV off and not buy the Star Tribune to get it.
Michael Cavlan
Powderhorn
Where is the evidence of anyone trying to promote violence? How is it that
attending a conference to plan protests against the RNC makes people violent
or in any way objectionable? How is it that suspicison of police (which
turned out to be quite justified), makes one violent or a provacteur,
especially where the beginning announcement referred to in the cited blog
emphasized that people should avoid arrest? Furthermore, what is this
"provacation" that police point to which somehow justified violently
attacking and randomly arresting peacefule bicyclists? As far as I can see,
the only "crime" was that some people verbally expressed some anger toward
police, especially after they randomly attacked and arrested people. Under
the constitution, people have a right to their feelings.
There are some who are demanding that participants or supporters of critical
mass immediately produce evidence to support claims of unlawful conduct by
police (notwithstanding that unlike the police, they are not trained to
immediately prepare reports to justify their actions, do not have paid
public relations people with immediate access to the press, and are busy
trying to get out of jail and prepare for likely criminal charges). Yet,
any innuendo by police about participants being violent or just provactive
(which is really all that is claimed), is automatically taken at face value.
I can appreciate people trying to examine the situation rationally and
without bias, but it does not accomplish much when it results in just
blaming the victims and trying to obscure police abuse thate is obvious.
Jordan S. Kushner
Golden Valley
In response to my link to http://stephenhero.wordpress.com/2007/09/02/blood-on-the-tracks/ Erik Hare writes: >I want everyone associated with Critical Mass to consider for a moment >that they are in danger of being hijacked by a group of people who intend >to promote violence. They do not care about CM, they want to use the >organization. They are attempting to get you riled up so that you will >fight the police alongside them. I actually went back to reread Steve Marsh's write up and on the second reading of it I guess he did feel that some of the problem was caused by "outside agitators" from <http://www.rncwelcomingcommittee.org/prenc-labor-day-2007/>pReNC, but I didn't see that the first time because I really doubt that it's true. It reads more to me like the pReNC folks are good organizers. They knew that they'd made it clear that the kicoff for their event this weekend was going to be the CM ride and they knew they police were likely to harass people as a result. Thus, they showed up with cards outlining everyone's rights. Nothing mroe or less then that. ("Taking over" a Critical Mass ride isn't something that's easy to do, incidentally). When reading other factual reports it's clear to me that the only provocation was done by the police. (Admittedly, I don't consider slowing up traffic and making someone five minutes late for "Are You Smarter then a Fifth Grader" to be provocation). If you're still looking for a report that doesn't just toe the Police line I suggest http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2007/08/mpls_police_adm.php#more and http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2007/09/critical_mass_u.php The second report in particular. The one where City pages says they have video of a presumably high ranking officers stating: "Drive down Nicollet, herd the assholes down there. Any blocking of traffic, any blocking of anything, arrest them." Jim McGuire Como
If anyone thinks this looks peaceful, they're delusional. When a LEO
finds him/herself in a situation like this, they are NOT going to just sit
back and see what happens. However it started, this is a situation on the
verge of becoming VERY serious and dangerous, for the cops and for the
bikers.
Kevin Wynn, Dad
Minneapolis, MN
2005 Ural Tourist - "Tripod"
Northern Bikers for Global Warming
I was at the CM ride on Friday but peeled off on Washington near 1st St. when
someone bumped into me and my chain fell off and by the time I got back on
track the group had split.
It was an awesome ride up to that point! There were well over 200 participants
(I'd guess closer to 300.) CM is a celebration of the bike community. And
outside of a few angry guys, there were more honks and shouts of support along
the way than not.
In general I support the police and am not eager to criticize those who do such
a difficult jog. But, I agree with Michelle Gross that the MPD and the
sheriff's department were very likely on the offensive because of the anti-RNC
organizing that was taking place this weekend. This is an important point. CM
happens monthly without incident. That the police were on the offensive means
they were probably going to find someone to arrest at some point--- maybe to
'send a message' to the anti-RNC organizers?
Also, the Star Tribune reported that the officer felt provoked. I'm concerned
that the MPD officers are not trained to remain calm in such a situation. When
I compare this to the provocation that the massers who stop traffic
endure....well, it seems to me there is a training opportunity here for the
MPD. I'm reminded of my mom telling me to not let my brothers "get my goat" as
a teen. I'm disappointed that the MPD didn't rise above that.
This does not bode well for how the police will interact with protesters at the
RNC in 2008. Let's hope it's used as a learning opportunity and not a
precedent for police response to protesters.
OK, a couple of quick ideas for folks-
1) Many cyclists in the Twin Cities area are fine, law-abiding
citizens. I'll grant the bike folks that. I hope they'll grant me
that many aren't- from my own personal experiences, I've had bikes
swerve toward me as I passed them to pound upon my vehicle, been spit
upon by bike riders, and nearly hit several for whom the concept of
"red light and/or stop sign means stop" apparently is a new one.
From what I can tell, it seems the Critical Mass folks are out to
tie up traffic and violate traffic laws to prove a point. OK, fine.
Then expect, as did the veterans of sit-ins in the '60s, to be
arrested, perhaps by overzealous police officers. It's one of the
risks one takes when one chooses civil disobedience.
2) Here's a thought- if troublemakers, be they from your group or
another, start trouble with the police at your protest, either get
the heck out of there or expect mace, tasers, etc. I'm not saying
it's right, or wrong. I'm saying it's reality. Much as many of the
Seattle protesters some years back wanted to claim that they,
personally, had "done nothing wrong" or that it was others who were
violent ("so why was *I* arrested?"), we see here a group of people,
many of whom may in fact have been law-abiding (although
participation in what seems to be a non-law-abiding protest tends to
put the lie to this), caught up in a melee that they perhaps didn't
start, but should have got away from or prevented. Which brings me
to another small point- if you are leading or involved in a peaceful
protest, and you see people trying to start violence, STOP THEM. If
you're truly worried about police brutality, why tolerate people
giving the police an excuse to act?
I grew up in North Minneapolis. One of the realities of that is that
I learned from a young age NOT to start fights/melees/fracases/
confrontations with the police- this is a situation that can not end
well for the civilians involved. You're outnumbered, outgunned, and
out-budgeted in nearly every instance.
I await your flames... ;-)
Here's one posted of more balanced local TV coverage of the arrests
from KARE-11:
I spent some time looking for New York City videos as Tim Salo and
Kevin Wynn suggested and found one on tactics, produced mostly by
NYPD, I think:
Here's one about differences between Brooklyn and Manhattan CM rides:
I was looking at videos of the supposedly more violent NYPD arrests
of CM riders and truthfully didn't see anything much worse than our
recent MPD actions, even the 2004 RNC stuff. The arrestees looked
liked kids throwing a tantrum and the others stereotypical after so
many viewings; it almost looked choreographed. I guess the MPD could
learn something from the NYPD, but it seems like the cost of dealing
with these arrests would be a waste of resources. Of course it is a
bit nebulous to make any sort of case based on videos posted to
youtube.com, but I did get a sense that NYPD knew what they were
doing as compared to MPD. The only other arrests I saw were in
California, and pretty tame.
I'm a little conflicted about both the event and the response. As a
once avid bicyclist, I've ridden in a few mass rides, and they have
an incredible sort of energy that surges through the riders and
powers various sorts of crowd behaviors, mostly that of moving
forward to a destination. Of course all my mass rides were for fun,
organized and supported with the consent of local authorities; I paid
cash for this fantastic experience, and I'm a bit resentful that
these kids are getting it for nothing. CM rides are not paid for by
participating cyclists in the same way -- they are paid for by all of
us. As long as there are no rides like the one last Friday, I don't
much mind paying; a little inconvenience is a small price to pay for
the message and experience of CM (I'd do it just for fun if I hadn't
developed a modicum of integrity over the years). Still, when I rode
more you'd see me ready to go, balancing in place on my bicycle or
propped up gripping a standard or someone or something else at a red
light, i.e., obeying the law; others have pointed out stopping at
lights or other like behavior as impractical in a mass ride, and I
agree, but the whole thing is impractical, indulgent even. These
scofflaws are making a point, but if we are to give credence to the
blog explanation Jim McGuire steered us to, then the conclusion is
that CM might have been co-opted, at least a bit. It seems like CM
could make the same point by brandishing their bicycles as protest
signs along major thoroughfares as they do now at points in their
rides and reduce their civil disobedience to once a year or so, or
perhaps go legitimate. Would charging a registration fee and pulling
a permit for an annual ride really be such a bad thing? For that
matter, enough folks bicycling for free legally from point A to point
B in Minneapolis would accomplish about the same thing, especially
with multiple routes, but perhaps take a bit longer.
I guess if you are going to break the law, Dyna is right that it is
best to do it on the Northside. I'm a little confused about her
statement that Transit for Livable Communities administers federal
funds for local transportation programs and wish she would elaborate
how this occurs; I thought they were basically an advocacy group
funded by grants and contributions.
I look forward to finding out more about what really happened to see
how best to address things, but the fact that human minds are not
fully developed until well into the Twenties seems to be the most
explanatory to me (the older participants would take a longer post
and who cares that much about those enabling sycophants, really?).
You can convince the young to do some pretty crazy things, like
running red lights on busy city streets on their bicycles or
enlisting in the armed services with G.W. Bush in power, but with
enough time and discussion, you can convince them of reasonable
courses of action as well.
I hope Mr. Bohn gets flamed off-list, if folks see the need; I
wouldn't want anyone breaking the rules here or singling him out for
his Northside conditioned response training. Like it or not, once the
brain takes shape, it is very hard, but not impossible, to change the
general patterns of the way we think; that's my personal experience,
anyway. There might be a few MPD and other city and county employed
folks working in Minneapolis who might benefit from exploring new
ways of thinking, too.
I should be a Critical Mass sympathizer. I'm a bicycle commuter and, riding
the bike lanes on Hennepin every day, have seen lots of bad drivers using the
bicycle lanes to drive in or as turn lanes, not seeing cyclists and, often,
police vehicles parked so as to block both bike lanes (in situations that are
clearly not emergencies).
As I say, I should be a sympathizer, but I have a hard time. Instead of
advocating for cyclists rights, defending the many rights cyclists already have
and going after the bad drivers who cause problems, the group seems to be about
breaking traffic laws, creating congestion and depriving perfectly innocent
drivers of the roadway and their legal right of way.
In any event, I wasn't there but have read the accounts on this list and
elsewhere and watched the videos - there seems to be plenty of blame to go
around here.
FAULT CM - CM seemed to expect and even look forward to trouble. Previous
events have had peaceful police escorts. Here, apparently, CM was passing out
"What to do if you get arrested" cards. Why exactly, given the peaceful rides
of the past? The police say they were "provoked" (see below). While this may
not have risen to the level of illegal conduct, certainly someone did something
unecessarily stupid to set them off.
FAULT POLICE - Even the police press release (aka the Star Tribune - which has
done a sorry job on this) only alleges that the police were "provoked." I'm
sorry, but the police aren't supposed to bust or even detain people when they
are "provoked." They should do so only when they see a crime being committed
or when they have probable cause to suspect a crime. If the police themselves
can't even allege a crime was committed, they reacted badly. And, while CM is
all about breaking traffic laws, tazing and macing people is a really stupid
way to put a stop to that.
FAULT CM - It's pretty much common sense that it's a bad idea for hundreds of
people to surround a couple of police officers and chant, yell and gesture at
them angrily. What did they expect the cops to do? I would have called for
help too. When an "officer needs assistance" call goes out, every available
officer responds, as they should. And when 40 plus unprepared officers - most
of whom probably had no idea what the event was even about - rush into an angry
crowd to rescue fellow officers in unknown danger, problems will result.
FAULT POLICE - Way overreaction. Once the immediate perceived threat was over,
the police should have pulled back. Traffic violations are a ticketing
offense, not a head bashing one. There have been allegations on the list that
police were tazering and macing non-resisting arrestees already in handcuffs
and targeting people solely because they had cameras. If true (I would like to
see some first hand accounts or pictures before making any judgements), the
officers responsible should be disciplined or fired. If a relatively minor
event like this draws this kind of overreaction, I think the police have a lot
of work to do before the convention next year. It would be telling to know
whether there was a commanding officer on the scene or whether this was just a
mass of non-ranking officers responding to an emergency call.
FAULT CM - When the police give you an order to disperse, you either say "yes
officer", get on your bike and ride like the wind or, if you don't, you pretty
much figure something bad is going to happen. Some things are worth getting
arrested for - but protesting over one's God given right to drive through red
lights is not high on my list.
Bottom line - most of these charges will be pled down to nothing or dropped.
The calmer heads is the police department will figure out a strategy for
dealing with this group (should have happened long ago), either leave them
alone and stay out of the way or give them all tickets with $115 fines. The
next ride will attract all kinds of local politicos and attention and will be
peaceful, then interest will fade.
Barry Clegg
Nicollet Island
Tim Salo described Critical Mass thusly: >It seems pretty clear that the Minneapolis Critical Mass gathering is lawless, in the sense that it flagrantly, even aggressively, ignores numerous laws, particularly those relating to traffic. Things like stopping for stop lights, stopping for stop signs, and from personal experience, yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Never mind accusations that some riders were seen trying to provoke drivers. It also appears that the Critical Mass gathering is a mob, in the sense that it derives a feeling of power from its numbers. This feeling of power enables it to engage in behaviors that participants wouldn't think of doing as individuals. . . ML: When I read this description the first time I thought that the writer was describing motorist behavior in bumper to bumper traffic conditions. I guess it all depends on the point of view from which one normally views the world: a view from inside of a metal cage propelled by artificial power vs. a view from being a part of the natural environment propelled by ones own power. Although I was fast asleep on my living room couch during the last CM, I've attended about four CM rides over my thirty plus years inhabiting this planet. They've been a mixed bag as Critical Mass has no leader and is not an organized activity, and therefore, has a certain level of unpredictability associated with it. I support bicyclists taking their proper place on the road in traffic. I support bicyclists following the rules of the road and occasionally protesting unjust and discriminatory laws through non-violent civil disobedience. The laws I refer to here are the "no more than two abreast" and "keeping to a single lane" laws. These laws give unnecessary and unjust preference and privilege to motorists. A more organized tactic such as Bill Kahn refers to may very well be more effective than the unorganized, organic Critical Mass as known today, but that's another topic. I'm certainly no Critical Mass apologist, per se. It is what it is: a reflection of those participating at a given event. For readers who really want to learn about the history of Critical Mass and what things could spiral into in Minneapolis given recent events, I recommend viewing the documentary film "We Are Traffic" on CM, focusing on its beginning in San Fransisco and a major response by law enforcement there: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=189314458200750949 The film is nearly an hour long, but it's very well done and very informative. While watching, I urge viewers to note how the operators of vehicles (bicycles) in CM traffic jams interact with each other compared to the operators of the dominant vehicle (cars) interact with each other in their traffic jams. Matty Lang, Midtown Phillips
How can traffic laws pertaining to bicycles such as the two that Matty Lang
named: "no more than two abreast" and "keeping to a single lane" laws
possibly be "unjust and discriminatory"? I guess that just about any
traffic law that you don't happen to like can be unjust and discriminatory
then.
There was a time when civil disobedience was a strategy applied to protest
real injustice and real discrimination; things like racial segregation,
starting and fighting wars for political gain, full civil right for gay and
lesbian citizens. Using civil disobedience to "protest" annoyances like
traffic rules that one dislikes seems degrading to something so symbolic and
so powerful when used to combat injustice and discrimination.
Jim Bernstein
Fulton
Well, I certainly am sorry to hear that personal mobility is not important
enough to some to justify standing up for one's place in society. I know that
we are going on about 60 years now of public space being taken from people
(pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users) in order to be given to automobiles
and places to store them (in traffic as well as in parking) so this practice
might seem normal and just, but I'll try to spell it out a bit more for those
who cannot quite grasp how relegating only one mode of transportation to travel
"no more than two abreast" or requiring it to "keep to a single lane (of the
public right of way)" might be considered unjust and discriminatory.
There was a time when people on foot, on bicycle and on public transit
(streetcars) dominated the public rights of way (streets) of Minneapolis. Cars
were kept in their proper place and Minneapolis thrived with a much larger
population (of people, not cars) than today. Today, the tables have turned.
Bicyclists, pedestrians and transit users are given a pittance of public space
(as well as public investment) while auto travel lanes and parking, wide and
plentiful, chop up Minneapolis creating barriers between neighbors and
neighborhoods resulting in bicyclists, pedestrians and transit users (people)
needing to fight, scrap and stand up for some space to breath, to move about
and to participate in our community and local economy.
How can this NOT be considered unjust or discriminatory?
I do believe that there are circumstances where their ought to be different
traffic laws pertaining to bicycles and cars. The two laws I cited are not
among those circumstances. We can start another thread on Minneapolis traffic
laws if others would like to have that discussion. My initial post in this
thread was communicating my interpretation of Critical Mass. If folks still
don't understand, I suggest viewing the documentary film I linked to on
Critical Mass again.
Matty Lang,
Midtown Phillips
I'm sorry to hear that the basic safety laws offend some, but there's
a simple reason for them: in any tangle between a cyclist and an
automobile (to say nothing of a city bus or light rail train), the
result is almost uniformly injurious for the cyclist, and generally
unpleasant for everyone else. Basic physics, really. Add together
the likelihood of injury to the cyclist in a crash, and the
overwhelmingly greater number of automobiles than bicycles on the
road, and you end up with laws meant to promote both traffic flow and
safety. (Laws, I might add, that in my decidedly non-scientific
observation seem to be flagrantly disobeyed by a far greater number
and percentage of bike riders than auto drivers- particularly the one
about stopping for red lights and stop signs.)
I'm all for peaceful (again, *peaceful*) protest, and I'm all for
civil disobedience in the service of righting great injustices. That
said, I'm not for setting out to provoke confrontation with police
just for sport, and certainly not for endangering innocent motorists
by riding unsafely just to make a point. (Reports of cyclists trying
to cause minor collisions were noted earlier.) Did the police
overreact here? Possibly- although no one familiar with police
operations should be surprised. An "officer needs assistance" call
is *always* going to bring many, many, police to an area, and they
are going to be focused on protecting their own. Were there bike
riders in the crowd looking to make a political statement by starting
trouble? Almost certainly. If CM (or any other group) wants to be
taken seriously, and not as a bunch of anarchist loonies, they need
to police themselves *before* conflict erupts with the police and
society at large.
Congratulations to the cyclist/anti-RNC/anarchist extremists at work
here- they've managed, yet again, to give themselves and our city a
black eye while accomplishing precious little else for their cause.
I believe the general divide between what you say here Jeremiah and what
Matty is stating is a matter of hierarchy. The basic traffic laws you cite
are based on the premise that vehicle traffic flow is paramount. That all
other methods of transportation are secondary.
How would our traffic laws read if priorities were first given to pedestrian
traffic, then bikes, then busses, then rail, and lastly automobiles? That's
not the way it is, but in a non-automobile centric world view, it might be.
Is that discussion a possibility?
Has there been any confirmation that members of our City Council will NOT be
joining in future Critical Mass rallies?
I would hope that our elected officials (or their staffs for that matter)?would
not be out there breaking the traffic laws, and blocking their own constituents
from moving about on our city streets.
Anthony Thompson
Standish
What about a "Critical Manners" - rally??
I have a question. What exactly are the aims of the
Critical Mass group? That is, what could the city, any
other unit of government or any nongovernmental body
do that would satisfy their demands (assuming they
have any)?
When ambulances and fire trucks are pulled by bikes, then we might agree
that bikes are of primary importance. Or even if 50% of our population
chose bikes, I might be swayed. As it stands, the USA is not a third world
country and we are ruled by the majority, with basic rights for the
minority. The Minneapolis utopia seems to be minority rule - because the
minority screams the loudest.
The majority will get sick of that soon enough.
Jenny Rubenzer, Maple Grove
This post (below) is irritatingly beside the point at hand and one
would think that you either work for the police department or one of
the major news outlets. You point out that the police response was
justified based on "Reports of cyclists trying to cause minor
collisions." So far there is no documented evidence that this
happened at all. There is however documented evidence of police over
reaction, lack of proper judgement and using tactics that
deliberately put innocent people into harm's way. Your further
marginalizing of the CM as a bunch of loony anarchists is completely
slanderous and 100% wrong. The CM ride is a calculated act of civil
disobedience whose tactics are known to both the participants and the
powers that be. People who participate in CM know that some traffic
laws will be deliberately broken as a part of the protest. This does
not make them any more loony (or extremist) than those who broke the
law fighting against segregation in the South, or fighting for
women's right to vote, etc. History shows that act is civil
disobedience often leads to reactionary violence by the state. Just
because it happens doesn't mean it is justified or we shouldn't be
concerned or angry when it does. As far the actual makeup of CM,
it's far from being just a rabble of "anarchist extremists" but
rather a multitude of ordinary citizens concerned that rampant car
culture that has made our city unsafe and unlivable.
Daniel Siskind (anarchist, gardener, father of 3, responsible citizen)
Windom Park, Minneapolis
This just in …Netherlands surprised to discover they are a third world country.
This strange little country on the northern edge of Europe, where bicycles and
trolleys seem to rule the streets, was shocked to learn from an American
suburbanite that theirs is a third world nation. We stopped a man on a bicycle
to get his reaction to the state of his country. We asked Christiaan what it
was like knowing that if there were an emergency that the fire truck or
ambulance had to be pulled by a bicycle. His reply: “What are you talking
about? This is crazy talk.” Obviously he didn’t approve and he seemed a little
embarrassed. Then he denied that they used bicycles for emergency vehicles. We
pointed out that he himself was riding a bicycle. “But I am not carrying
emergency equipment and ladders and such things. I am just going to my work.
What is wrong with you?” Put off by our tough questions, Christiaan made a
hasty retreat.
So we stopped another person, this time a woman, also on a bicycle. It seems
they are everywhere here. We asked Annake if she rides her bike to work every
day. She replies, in perfect English, “Yes, and to the shops, too. Unless it is
raining. Then I take a tram.” You must have to share the road with cars, we
asked. She tells us they actually have separate bike paths on every street,
even out in the countryside. And, crazy as this may seem, cars have to yield to
bicycles. We wondered if she wouldn’t rather drive a car, by herself, on a
large road where bicycles are forbidden, that is filled with cars from all her
neighbours and co-workers, and 150,000 other people from nearby towns and
suburbs all coming to the city at the same time. But Annake, as is typical of
most third worlders, couldn’t see the sense in this. “How could they all fit on
the road? Where would you park all those cars? You would have to tear down half
of the city. Amsterdam is a beautiful city. I wouldn’t want to tear half of it
down.” Obviously - inexplicably, the Dutch seem to choose to live in these
third world conditions. Until they are ready, like the USA, to tear down large
portions of their cities, and increase there commuting distance several-fold,
we just cannot see how this weird nation will ever know democracy and get out
of the third world.
Xan Cassiel
A Crisscrossing of Freeways and Parking Lots
also known as Cedar Riverside
I have scrutinized the RNC Welcoming Committee web site and I saw
nothing stating they set off to provoke the police on Friday. It does
say people from an (anti) RNC planning event were present and gives
an account of what happened. I hardly feel this a the smoking gun
that shows that they were there to cause trouble. They merely
participated in an already planned and regularly occurring event.
Saying these people did anything other than swell the numbers of last
week's Critical Mass is purely speculative (and exactly what the cops
want you to believe)
As for evidence, I am referring to the footage shown on the TV news
as well as from bystanders on YouTube. The images I saw showed the
police violently attacking random people and indiscriminately
spraying mace at anyone that happened to be within range, CM
participant or not. The charges made against those arrested are so
vague that it will allow the police to fabricate whatever story they
want (and experiences shows that they will) to justify their
actions. The police have made great pains to say they are reviewing
footage from the incident to look for criminal activity. To me this
sounds like they are grasping at straws trying to justify what happened.
So what does the RNC have to do with Critical Mass? Let's consider
that the leadership of the Republican Party are from oil family
backgrounds and represent very rich and powerful oil interests. If
you're interested in hurting these people where it counts, then get
on a bike and leave the gas-guzzling car at home. The bicycle is the
ultimate form of protest against fat, lazy, grossly obese and oil-
dependent culture we live in. It shouldn't take a genius to make that
connection.
Falling back on the whole North Side vs. South Side doesn't do much
for your argument and and isn't even valid. I've lived / worked in
all corners of this city and everywhere has its' problems. For much
of this decade I lived in the heart of East Phillips neighborhood,
where drug-dealing, prostitution, assault, murder are just as much a
part of the landscape as in North Minneapolis. When the something
really, really bad happened the cops would make a show of force for a
few days. After things calmed down the cops went back to blocking
bike lanes and loitering in front of Block E. Meanwhile the
neighborhood crime wave continued just as it had before.
A little off subject, but there is something else I want to mention.
The similarity about my time East Phillips and Hawthorne (in North
Minneapolis) was that people in cars (usually nice ones driving by
suburban yuppie types) were the main customers of drug dealers and
prostitution. Similarly, both my wife and myself have both been
victims of drunk driving accidents on two separate occasions.
Although they happened years apart, in both cases the drunken drivers
lived in the suburbs (Richfield and Bloomington) and had been
drinking in downtown Minneapolis prior to getting in their cars. I
was on a bicycle and hit from behind. My wife was on a motorcycle and
was hit head on. In all of these cases the criminals somehow used
cars to as a part of committing their criminal act: be it buying (and
ostensibly using) drugs, picking up hookers, or merely as a means to
get their drunken selves home.
As far as I can tell all you are merely criticizing people for being
out on the street and legitimately raising their voices. I think
sweeping improvements to livability need to happen in all depressed /
forgotten / downtrodden areas of Minneapolis and surrounding areas.
Instead of meanly criticizing one group for making a stand, you
should consider that they might have some valid points regardless of
tactical or ideological differences.
That is my piece for today. Thanks for reading.
Dan
Windom Park, Minneapolis
If you would like to speak specifically about the Netherlands, consider that
their population is one of the most densely populated countries in the world
(top 25) with over 1,200 people per square mile with a total area of just
over 16,000 square miles. Of course they are going to have different modes
of transportation. I hate to do a "no duh" here, but we're not talking
apples and oranges, nor bananas.
Correct me if I am wrong, although Minneapolis has a higher density than the
Netherlands, its population is under 15% of the entire metro area. With the
number of people coming and going on a daily basis from outside the city
limits and with light rail serving such a small area and with our harsh
winters, how could bikes EVER be a primary source of transport for the
majority and therefore outrank cars on the road? It's that minority over
majority mindset that leaves me so confused.
Then again, I am always left with more questions than answers from the
forum. Here's a few...where did the Netherlands come into play? Xan, do
you think that country is comparable to the Minneapolis metro? Would you
not agree that roads and traffic laws allow for emergency vehicles to
quickly and efficiently make their way where they are needed? I think it
was Wizard who had praised suburban area emergency vehicles for their quick
response to the 35W bridge collapse (I could be wrong). How many on the
list would forcibly remove commuters from cars and place them on public
transport or bikes? Where would that line be drawn and when (how soon)?
Jenny Rubenzer, suburbanite Maple Grove
This reminds me of long ago when i was a part of a group called the Lesbian
Avengers - we did public actions..street theatre, some wheat pasting and yes
some billboard modification. We had a street theatre action planned for the
steps in front of the Basilica. I was one of the first to arrive with a few
others. There they were 4 paddy wagons, cops with shields, several cop cars.
Several of the people i was with were scared - we never did violent actions and
this was very intimidating. My take was that they were just showing us how
powerful we were and that it was our job to not let them overreact...really.
Cops who are pumped up and ready for a take down - especially those with
testosterone - react quickly and aggressively and they overreact.
They are human and they make mistakes. I also think this was posturing for the
RNC.
peace
Leigh combs
Pwderhorn park
where we plant trees not statues
The important point made in the post about bikes in
Amsterdam is that there bikes and automobiles (and
trams) are separated, really separated. Bike lanes
there are set apart by curbing and even have their own
traffic signals (which bicyclists wouldn't dream of
ignoring, BTW). There is none of the nonsense of
declaring that bikes should have 'primacy.' The
different modes of urban transport all have their
place and don't interfere with each other.
That's the real message of biking in Amsterdam. Bikes
and autos don't belong in the same space.
I'm not anti-bike by any means but the Critical Mass
people are not helping get done what's needed; more
bike lanes separated from automobile traffic.
Dan at Profane Existence wrote:
> The CM ride is a calculated act of civil
> disobedience whose tactics are known to both the participants and the
> powers that be. People who participate in CM know that some traffic
> laws will be deliberately broken as a part of the protest.
Mark Anderson:
Is this true? Is CM committing civil disobedience and purposefully
breaking laws? If so, I don't understand the commotion about being
arrested.
Civil disobedience has an important function in this country. One
commits a crime against an unjust law, then submits to going to jail.
When arrestee gets out of jail he/she goes ahead and does it again, and
again submits to arrest. The whole point of the act is to demonstrate
the injustice of the law and the sincerity of the protesters by serially
breaking of the law and constant acceptance of the consequences.
That certainly isn't what CM is doing. I saw a couple of the CM You
Tube videos. The individuals weren't submitting to arrest. Instead the
crowd was trying to intimidate the arresting officers by loud chanting
to let the arrestees go. This isn't civil disobedience -- it's a rowdy
mob. In fact it's offensive that Dan would call it civil disobedience.
If Dan is correct, CM has no argument.
This is not about pedestrians and transit, it's about bicycles! Pedestrians
in Minneapolis live in one of the most "sidewalked" cities in the United
States and have absolute right of way on those sidewalks. Motorists (and
bicyclists) are required by law to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks and
unmarked intersections. Public transit - lets talk busses for a moment -
operate on fixed routes and enjoy some special privileges that motorists do
not have, but otherwise operate under the same rules as any other motor
vehicle. And, this is not about "personal mobility" rights - one has the
right to bicycle or walk just anyplace in Minneapolis if one chooses to do
so.
I confess, I am at a loss to figure out where "public space" has been "taken
away from" pedestrian, bicycle riders or transit.
Yes, there was a time in Minneapolis when most of citizenry did not use an
automobile as their primary mode of transportation - they used horse drawn
vehicles or the horse itself. I cannot find any data that suggest the
bicycle was ever regarded as a primary form of transportation, though it is
clear that over the last 120 years or so, some Minneapolitans have used a
bicycle to get around. But for the last 80 years or so, the automobile has
been the preferred choice of transit - especially from about 1950 forward.
Cars were never "kept in their place" - they had to yield to horse drawn
vehicles, to pedestrians, and streetcars just like today. As more folks in
Minneapolis acquired an automobile, they did ask for places to park them and
for better roads to operate them on. The demand for parking space remains
unabated but both the City and private operations have figured out to make a
buck out that demand. Bicyclists, public transit, and pedestrians do not
have to pay to park.
There are many of us who advocate for more funding for public transit, more
transit options and more alternatives to fossil fuel driven automobiles and
who are bicycle friendly but, rely primarily on an automobile for
transportation. The reality is that today and in the foreseeable future,
the automobile will still be the primary mode of transportation for 85-92%
of our population as they commute and move about the urban area.
Minneapolis has already taken significant steps in the past 5-8 years to
provide more (and safer) accommodations for bicycle commuters and I believe
there are more steps underway or intended.
From my experience and my observation, events like Critical Mass only
aggravate more people and most certainly do not engender more support for
bicycle commuters. The same goes for bicycle commuters who insist on being
part of the traffic flow but routinely ignore traffic laws that motor
vehicles have to obey.
Jim Bernstein
Fulton
Jim Bernstein wrote: >This is not about pedestrians and transit, it's about bicycles!. . . ML: I beg to differ. This is about land use, transportation, design, the built environment in which we live and public space. Jim Bernstein continues: >And, this is not about "personal mobility" rights - one has the right to bicycle or walk just anyplace in Minneapolis if one chooses to do so. ML: I agree with this statement. This is not about rights; it's about the fact that certain modes (actually ONE mode) of transportation are given preference over others through the allocation of public space and the level of public investment in each mode: walking, bicycling, transit and the private automobile. Jim Bernstein confesses: >I confess, I am at a loss to figure out where "public space" has been "taken away from" pedestrian, bicycle riders or transit. ML: One need not look very far as our city has been bulldozed repeatedly in order to make space for the private automobile. I suppose the paramount example would be the razing of neighborhoods in order to impose Interstates 35W and 94 (like a cross to bear) upon Minneapolis. More recent examples include the widening of Lyndale Avenue at Lake Street which is about to be completed and the reconstruction of my very own (my living room overlooks it) Lake Street. While surfing the web a couple of years ago, I came across this parody of a demonstration on how to walk on the new narrow sidewalks of Lake Street that demonstrates the situation nicely: http://www.stride-mn.org/docs/flash/HenneToon.swf Jim does concede that the demand for private automobile storage has not been abated and endorses this give away of land to auto storage because "the City and private operations have figured out to make a buck out that demand." Countless published studies demonstrate that using land for auto parking does not provide a good return on investment to the city. Any other land use (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) would add much more to the city's bottom line than any profit it could realize from the auto parking business. Aren't we currently in the process of selling off all of our lucrative parking operations anyway? Some folks at City Hall seem to get it at least. Jim goes on: >I cannot find any data that suggest the bicycle was ever regarded as a primary form of transportation, though it is clear that over the last 120 years or so, some Minneapolitans have used a bicycle to get around. But for the last 80 years or so, the automobile has been the preferred choice of transit - especially from about 1950 forward. ML: Well, the bicycle (along with walking and public transit) is certainly regarded as my primary mode of transportation and I'm not alone. Many Minneapolitans do not own automobiles and do not want to. But, let's look to history again to guide us here. During the summer of 2005 I attended a fine production at In the Heart of the Beast, called "Lake Street Excursions". The mobile (the audience actually walked, really nobody drove or rode Segways, between multiple destinations along Lake Street) performance treated us to the (hi)story of one of Minneapolis' most traveled (not always by private automobiles) thoroughfares. We learned that before people were in Minneapolis Lake street was a walking path for wild life between the Lakes and the river. Lake street then became a walking route for local indigenous communities before European colonialists sailed across the ocean blue in 1492. The next incarnation of Lake street was a 4 foot wide bicycle road. Streetcars came next and we all should know the rest. It wasn't until the 1950's as Jim correctly points out that the automobile became king on Lake Street. Today, I look out of my window and witness seas of asphalt covered surface parking lots. I can walk down the hallways of my building and view historic photographs of the neighborhood housing stock being razed to create the first surface parking lot for the private automobile in the state of Minnesota. I know all too well about public space being taken away from people and given to the automobile. I live next door to the evidence. Jim Bernstein implies that we are powerless and doomed to our auto-oriented-ness: > The reality is that today and in the foreseeable future, the automobile will still be the primary mode of transportation for 85-92% of our population as they commute and move about the urban area. ML: This is true IF we don't change the way we look at land use, transportation, design, the built environment in which we live and public space. Thankfully we are changing the the paradigm we use for these important factors to way we live our lives and build our communities. Again, Jim notes that the automobile did not dominate our city until the 1950's--a point I have made repeatedly in this and other forums. What Jim neglects to point out is that the automobile's domination was a direct result of public policy choices related to land use, transportation, design, the built environment in which we live and public space. A sensible and sustainable mode share to emulate (as I've suggested numerous time in this forum) is demonstrated in Copenhagen Denmark where the mode share is split almost equally with 1/3 riding bicycles, 1/3 using transit and walking and 1/3 using private automobiles. Yes, I've heard the nonsensical comments that northern Europe is different and we can't do that here. For those who buy that argument I invite you to join me at an upcoming Urban Land Institute event on October 11, "Vital Winter Cities" where Jan Gehl, of Copenhagen will help us understand how things can be different in Minneapolis, if only we develop the will to put our collective feet down and demand an end to the invasion of the automobile. Interested parties can contact me off-list if you'd like registration details. My main point is that choosing to continue down the auto-dominated path is not the best choice for Minneapolis; in fact its a choice that flies in the face of all known facts on the subject. It's a stubborn clinging to an unsustainable illusion of a lifestyle. Thankfully, this stubbornness is beginning to lose its hold with more and more Minneapolitans choosing to walk, bicycle and take transit to fulfill more and more of their daily needs. Do folks realize that over half of our automobile trips are four miles or less and that almost half of the automobile trips are less than two miles long? Is it a good use of land and resources to be making these trips using the private automobile? Yes, cars were kept to their place in the past. Their place is to be used in appropriate circumstances and places. We have lost this good sense for the moment. Finally, some photo documentation showing the devolution of the public space of Minneapolis from a multi-modal place where people are welcome and safe to an auto-dominated environment where people without the protection of a steel cage (automobile) enter at their own peril: 1905: http://collections.mnhs.org/visualresources/image.cfm?imageid=93613&Page=2&Keywords=streetcars&SearchType=Advanced 1906: http://collections.mnhs.org/visualresources/image.cfm?imageid=86542&Page=2&Keywords=streetcars&SearchType=Advanced 1953: http://collections.mnhs.org/visualresources/image.cfm?imageid=70335&Page=9&Keywords=streetcars&SearchType=Advanced 1970: http://collections.mnhs.org/visualresources/image.cfm?imageid=72456&Page=1&Keywords=35W%20Minneapolis&SearchType=Advanced Today: http://www.metrocouncil.org/Directions/transit/images_transit/bus_shoulder.jpg And some Streetcar history: http://www.mpls.lib.mn.us/history/images/m3857.jpg Matty Lang, Midtown Phillips
One thing Matty is forgetting is personal productivity--my ability to do
everything I need (or want) to do in a 24 hour period. Should my family and
I bike or take mass transit, there would be no soccer, karate, last minute
grocery shopping, movies, dinner out,or for me...work. We would be reduced
to living for necessities only. That sounds horrible to me, I get a great
deal of pleasure from their activities and my work.
I don't want to live in the 1870's or even the 1950's. I like to be able to
get anywhere in the metro within 30 minutes. My family and I benefit from
that. Minneapolis benefits from suburban citizens working, playing and
spending. Which many fewer would do if we had to walk, bike or bus to get
there.
Matty is not talking about moving forward, he's talking about moving
backward.
When dealing with clients relocating from other cities, I am proud to show
off Minneapolis. It's a beautiful city with a good deal of green space
worked around and thru it. Those productive families would not be
considering moving here if we looked and functioned like a city from the
50's. If their quality of life was reduced to a 4 mile (or less in the
winter) radius of their home, except where mass transit was the only other
option they would not come here and many others would leave. There goes
your tax base and there goes you $$ for bike path maintenance. It's just
lunacy to be so extreme.
Jenny
Jennifer Rubenzer, Mapel Grove
On Thursday 06 September 2007 12:11, Jennifer Rubenzer wrote:
> One thing Matty is forgetting is personal productivity--my ability to do
> everything I need (or want) to do in a 24 hour period. Should my family
> and I bike or take mass transit, there would be no soccer, karate, last
> minute grocery shopping, movies, dinner out,or for me...work. We would be
> reduced to living for necessities only. That sounds horrible to me, I get
> a great deal of pleasure from their activities and my work.
Why do you assume one could not do the same with public transit? If
we invested properly, it would be easy to do so. 30 minutes anywhere
in the metro? No problem with adequate investment in buses and rail.
We really have to get our from the assumtions we're stuck in. These
assumptions are an outgrowth of federal and state policies that heavily
favored (and still favor) the automobile. Sprawl exists because it was
engineered. It's not a result of individuial choice.
David Greene
The Wedge
> Why do you assume one could not do the same with public transit? If
> we invested properly, it would be easy to do so. 30 minutes anywhere
> in the metro? No problem with adequate investment in buses and rail.
but there are things that simply not suited for mass transit such as
my hauling of 36 patio blocks, 10 bags of sand and 20 bags of paver
base, so I could put in a patio last weekend.
> Sprawl exists because it was engineered. It's not a result of individuial
choice.
There had to be some choice or there wouldn't be people that still
live in the relatively crowded city. Based on the above, wouldn't one
expect that population density we level across the entire region? I
could live in lakeville, prior lake, eagan, burnsville and get to work
in the same amount of time or quicker than I do from north minneapolis
yet i choose to live there. Certainly civil engineering played a role
in the choices we have but people still have to make the choice.
John Harris
webber-camden
David Greene writes:
> We really have to get our from the assumtions we're stuck in. These
> assumptions are an outgrowth of federal and state policies that heavily
> favored (and still favor) the automobile. Sprawl exists because it was
> engineered. It's not a result of individuial choice.
>
David is right, but it's more than physical engineering that's taken place.
The fact is, automobiles have become a part of the American psyche. We have
become psychologically engineered. Autos stand for benefits that go far
beyond those that are rational such as mobility. Autos have come to deliver
very emotional and even transformational benefits of freedom and expression
of our personalities. Take away the automobile from many, and you have taken
away their liberty and sense of freedom.
I'm not saying if this is right or wrong. I'm just saying rational arguments
will have little affect on this deeply rooted association.
Steve Kotvis
Minneapolis
Katherine Kersten's take on Critical Mass "Last Friday, I inadvertently found myself in the midst of the opening salvo of a battle to turn the Twin Cities upside down next year. I was driving home at rush hour from downtown Minneapolis, when several hundred bicyclists blocked the street leading to Interstate 394." Here is the rest of the column: http://www.startribune.com/kersten/story/1404372.html Bill Dooley Kenny
That's rich. A columnist in Star Tribune equating Friday's Critical
Mass riders with terrorists. I suppose we shouldn't expect anything
less judging from the poor quality of their initial coverage.
Daniel Siskind
Windom Park, Minneapolis
Council Member Cam Gordon has posted a response to the 8/31 Critical Mass incident on his blog here: http://secondward.blogspot.com/2007/09/response-to-august-31-incident-at.html. Robin Garwood Cooper Aide to Second Ward Council Member Cam Gordon
Bill, it's too fine a day to waste it reading drivel.
Most of the posts to this list seem to assume that Critical Mass will be at the
Republican Convention en masse just to "turn the Twin Cities upside down." That
sure gives CM, a loose association of pedalers, much more power than there
pedals warrant. In my estimation, they are not organized enough to do that,
particularly since they insist on bring their bicycles with them everywhere
they go.
A national political convention is, in my estimation, something to be avoided
at all costs, either as a player, observer, or service provider. But anyone who
goes to one for either the Reps. or the Dems. should be prepared for quite a
lot of hoo-hah and general mayhem from conventioneers, protesters, cops,
undercover FBI and Secret Service agents, enthusiasts, and trouble makers.
Locally, the least salubrious of those who will appear hoping for a dustup will
be the Skinheads. Though small in number, they live for brawls and will try to
create one just to throw punches and kicks. (Funny story: a decade ago =/-, a
gaggle of Skinheads appeared on Peavey Plaza, on that pretty summer day hosting
a small celebration. A principal speaker was enrolled White Earth member Vernon
Bellcourt. Mr. Bellcourt is a middle aged, tall, thin specimen of the Dakota
nation, with traditionally braided, greying hair. One Skinhead ignoramous, six
feet tall, wearing metal studded boots and wristlets, and other leather
accoutrements (hmm) got right in Vernon's face and shouted, "Go back where you
came from," baring his need for a dentist, the chords of his neck standing out
in high relief. Vernon, no fool he, declined to engage.)
The bulk of protesters at the RNC will be a combination of free speech
promoters, who will hurl words through angry mouths, and the opposition to the
current administration, many, though not all, of whom will be democrats. They,
too, will hurl words. Many will loft signs of protest. They will be present
under terms of the Constitution, excercising the right of the people to
peaceably assemble seeking redress of grievances.
There will be welcoming enthusiasts of the Republican party and
conventioneers, some of whom will also be primed for a confrontation. If we are
lucky, they will only hurl words.
There will be undercover FBI and Secret Service mixed in with the crowd, and
FBI and Secret Service with traditional "suits, ties, skinny brim hats, and
black shiny FBI shoes," and ear buds, their uniform.
There will be more uniformed cops from several jurisdictions than you will want
to see all at once.
And media, media, media, media, media, on foot, with cameras, in trucks, in
helicopters, with microphones and lights and whatever else they tote around.
All of this fermenting stew will be massed around the entrances to Energy
Center in St. Paul, or as near as they will be "allowed" to get.
I think it a very safe bet that all these people protesting, welcoming,
organized and disorganized, in uniform and out, with a small contingent of
nogoodniks (on any/all sides) can guarantee a melee. Someone(s) will start
stuff "just to see what happens," and that will be all it takes.
If we're very lucky, some will have enough of a sense of self-preservation to
run or take shelter. Unfortunately, if a crowd is large enough, many in the
crowd will not see a problem erupt, but will feel the brunt of one that
happens. Once inside a crowd, you can see nothing except the bodies immediately
ajacent.
If both the Reps. and the Dems. were to hold their conventions here, I would
want to be able to protest at both conventions. While the Reps., presently in
power, have given us nothing but grief and arrogance, the dems haven't done us
any favors either and need to be told so quite thoroughly.
In short supply at national conventions next year? Humor and a general air of
optimism.
WMarks, Central
I've heard that link might not be working properly, so just go to the blog's homepage: http://secondward.blogspot.com/. Robin Garwood Cooper Aide to Second Ward Council Member Cam Gordon
The period at the end of the link in Robin's post might cause problems for some folks. If so, please try this link: http://secondward.blogspot.com/ Mark Snyder Windom Park
Steve Kotvis wrote:
> David Greene writes:
>
>> We really have to get our from the assumtions we're stuck in. These
>> assumptions are an outgrowth of federal and state policies that heavily
>> favored (and still favor) the automobile. Sprawl exists because it was
>> engineered. It's not a result of individuial choice.
>>
>>
> David is right, but it's more than physical engineering that's taken place.
> The fact is, automobiles have become a part of the American psyche. We have
> become psychologically engineered. Autos stand for benefits that go far
> beyond those that are rational such as mobility. Autos have come to deliver
> very emotional and even transformational benefits of freedom and expression
> of our personalities. Take away the automobile from many, and you have taken
> away their liberty and sense of freedom.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
You've hit the nail on the head that people would consider restrictions
on their auto use a reduction in their freedom and liberty. And
rightfully so. The car gives us great freedom that people didn't have
before it was invented. But I don't understand your comment about this
desire being psychologically engineered. Our Founding Fathers had a
great desire for freedom and liberty too -- were they psychologically
engineered?
And David's comment that a good mass transit system allows as much
freedom as automobiles is WAY exaggerated. Even in New York City, with
its great subway system, it'd be much easier to get around with a car if
not for the parking problems. And outside New York City proper, which
is much more comparable to Minneapolis outside downtown, it still is
much easier to get around with a car. It just doesn't make economic
sense to have a comprehensive mass transit system before the Metro hits
10 million people.
David Greene wrote:
Why do you assume one could not do the same with public transit? If
we invested properly, it would be easy to do so. 30 minutes anywhere
in the metro? No problem with adequate investment in buses and rail.
Mark Anderson:
Keep dreaming, David. You know this will never happen, so I don't know why you
push such a utopian vision. To provide 30 minute access to anywhere in the
Metro 24 hours per day would probably require a hundred fold increase in
spending. If we're going to discuss the virtues of mass transit, at least have
a reasonable goal.
"Even in New York City, with its great subway system,
it'd be much easier to get around with a car if not
for the parking problems."
The poster of the above obviously hasn't spent much
time in New York City. Anyone who has tried to drive
cross-town in Manhattan knows that there's more reason
to take the subway, or even walk, than the scarcity of
parking spots. And the same is true if you're trying
to get to many places in Brooklyn or the other
boroughs.
Minneapolis may not have the density or sheer volume
of people to require a heavy rail transit solution
like the NY subway system but the automobile is only
convenient so long as there aren't too many of them
trying going to the same place at the same time. At
some point, even in Minneapolis, the volume of
automobile traffic will choke the road/street system
and make another solution necessary.
The freedom afforded by the automobile exists only so
long as there aren't too many people attempting to
exercise that freedom all at once.
Well, I'm gonna beg to differ on this one.
I've spent a fair amount of time in NYC. I lived there and worked in all
five boroughs as part of my job.
We lived in Washington Heights (northern Manhattan) and we owned a car
(rather unusual, but it was a vestige of being a Minnesotan we just weren't
ready to give up). We found it easier to drive to some places on the west
side and east side, for that matter, than take the train. All depended on
time of day we left, time of day we're returning, etc.
Keep in mind there are few truly cross-town trains in NYC capable of getting
from the west side to the east side with a minimum of hassle. That's why one
takes the bus cross town. With Metrocard, it's a snap. Sure, one can get
cross-town on the train, but it's a bigger hassle than it's worth.
When I lived there in the early to mid-90s, parking spots weren't the hassle
everybody makes them out to be. There's a fair amount of turnover at the
places one needs turnover. If one wants to park say at 94th and Madison
Avenue, well spots will be harder to find since it's primarily residential.
But if one wants to park in the area of Lincoln Center or 72nd and B'Way or
Amsterdam, it isn't as tough as people think it is.
I find making any transportation comparisons between Minneapolis and New
York are usually way off. They're simply not comparable for about like two
dozen reasons. The freedom to own an automobile can be and should be
regulated by the market. Too many cars means a downturn in productivity, and
other forms of transportation or solutions will be found. Forcing other
forms of transportation is not the answer.
Mike Thompson
Windom
M Charles Swope wrote:
> The poster of the above obviously hasn't spent much
> time in New York City. Anyone who has tried to drive
> cross-town in Manhattan knows that there's more reason
> to take the subway, or even walk, than the scarcity of
> parking spots. And the same is true if you're trying
> to get to many places in Brooklyn or the other
> boroughs.
>
Mark Anderson:
Of course one wouldn't drive across Manhattan! I would always walk the
few blocks that would entail. But when I've been in New York, most
trips have included uptown or downtown routes, which were much faster
when I've had a car available, as long as I could find a place to park.
Even more so when traveling outside of Manhattan, except in the unusual
situation where there was a direct subway line between the beginning and
ending points.
> Minneapolis may not have the density or sheer volume
> of people to require a heavy rail transit solution
> like the NY subway system but the automobile is only
> convenient so long as there aren't too many of them
> trying going to the same place at the same time. At
> some point, even in Minneapolis, the volume of
> automobile traffic will choke the road/street system
> and make another solution necessary.
>
Mark Anderson:
Even with all the traffic we have in the Twin Cities, a car is still
usually faster than even mass transit that goes directly between
locations desired (and a direct bus route is very rare for me at
least). It is twice as fast for me to drive downtown during rush hour
as to take the bus, even though I have a bus stop two blocks from my
house, which goes directly downtown. And the traffic we have is only as
bad as it is because Minnesota had been so anti-highway for the last
thirty years, so population growth has grown much faster than road
space. At some point high density makes mass transit a better choice
than driving a significant portion of the time, at which point a more
extensive system makes sense. My guess it that arrives at a metro
population of about 10 million.
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 19:23:34 -0500, Michael Thompson wrote:
>The freedom to own an automobile can be and should be
>regulated by the market.
Of course it should be.
On the other hand, the degree to which we as a society build and
maintain roads for you to drive it on should be a matter of public
policy rather than "the market". That part requires collective taxation
and expenditure.
Gax tax...paying for what we use. How about a bike tax? A buck per thousand
rotations! I like it.
Jennifer rubenzer heading to soccer from maple grove
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 08:50:51 +0000, Jennifer Rubenzer wrote:
>Gax tax...paying for what we use.
The gas tax doesn't anywhere near pay for all the construction,
maintenance, snowplowing, law enforcement, and such for that asphalt.
The difference is made up from taxes like property taxes, sales taxes
(which I think gas purchasers get a free ride on), income taxes (via
LGA), and special assessments. Don't kid yourself, auto drivers get
heavy subsidies.
When they resurfaced the street in front of my house, the city sent me a
bill for it. They even sent bills to homeowners who didn't own cars!
Excuse the typos please
Emergency vehicles must have roads. Don't kid yourself...evertone should pay
for that.
Dave - what did you think of the bike tax to pay for bike trails? Would a
thousand rotations be fair for a buck? Other than bikers and walkers does the
taxpayer see any alternate use for them? Maybe we could go back to my
ridiculous comment earlier this week about bike drawn emergency vehicles.
Silly me!
- now headinh to Edina for another soccer game. Shoot-with two tandem bikes
we could get our family of four there in an hour and a half. I just hate these
cars and freeways!
Jennifer Rubenzer Maple Grove
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Jennifer, I think you live a lifestyle that is far more privileged
(and mobile) than most people who live in the inner city. I'm all for
roads and mobility for those who can afford it, but that does little
for a huge chunk of people who don't have the money to spend on
minivans, soccer, karate, Blackberries, and even email. I do happen
to have enough money for all those things, but I have chosen a
lifestyle that does not require an automobile. I happen to live right
in the heart of the city where I don't even need a car to do all
those things. Everything I need is within walking distance (or a
quick hop on the bus) and I would never dream of "escaping" to the
suburbs. Even if us upwardly mobile are in the majority, it does not
give them the right to destroy functioning communities, ecosystems,
etc. to build a road through it or a parking lot on top of it. I'm
not writing this because I am a car hater by any means. I own to
Detroit-built behemoths and ride my motorcycle more than my bicycle.
I am however not blind to the fact that there is a ridiculous amount
of traffic congestion in this city and it is getting worse day by
day. Continuing to add more cars on the road is only going to make
things worse. We can't wait for the cities to be in total gridlock
before we wake up to this fact. The time for alternatives to a car-
based transportation system is already upon us.
Choking on auto fumes in NE Minneapolis
Daniel Siskind
Windom Park
On Sep 8, 2007, at 9:23 AM, Jennifer Rubenzer wrote:
> You did not answer my question. I'll ask again. How do we supply
> the grocery stores and put out neighbors house fire without roads?
> They are public good in more ways than one. That's why they are
> supported by more than a gas tax. Come on-David engage.
The name's Dan. You're obviosuly paying little attention to anything
I write, but here's your answer anyway...
If roads are public good in more ways than one then why is it that
you only have one argument? How about you answer what good are
emergency vehicles when the roads are too clogged to let them
through? Rush hour on I-394, I-35W, I-494/694,Highway 55, Highway
36, Highway 62, etc, are pure gridlock during rush hour, as are most
of the main arterial roads. Emergency crews may as well be riding on
turtles rather than use our great (and expensive) road system. AND
IT'S NOT GETTING ANY BETTER!
>
> My lifestyle and choices are exactly that. Where does personal
> choice end? At the party line?
It's your personal choice to live as irresponsibly as you wish, but
that does not put your choices and lifestyle above criticism. Living
a sustainable and responsible lifestyle has nothing to do with party
affiliation.
>
> Previuosly I noted that MPLS is about 13% of the metro population.
> Is that number accurate? What would your quality of life be like
> if the oth 87% tried to squeeze in? We'd have a plethera of
> issues- the roads being the least of our worries.
That happens every day between 6 am and 6 pm Monday thru Friday and
it makes life hell for everyone on the roads. I do a lot of driving
for my job and I make every effort to get everything done by 9 am
Otherwise the drives take twice as long as more and more people our
into the city.
I'm sorry to hear about the soccer game results. When I grew up we
walked or rode bikes to games. The only time I can remember actually
driving to a game for for the city championships.
Daniel Siskind
Windom Park, Minneapolis
On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 11:56:51 +0000, Jennifer Rubenzer from the suburb of
Maple Grove wrote:
>Emergency vehicles must have roads. Don't kid yourself...evertone should pay
for that.
Everyone thinks government handouts are terrible. But everyone thinks
their own personal case should be an exception.
I think roads for emergency vehicles are reasonable. It requires a
single lane (with perhaps sidings or turnoffs occasionally). Less,
actually, because we've got alleys. If we keep the alleys open,
emergency vehicles can use those. There are a few places in Mpls (like
Milwaukee Ave.) where there is no street (or rather, the former "street"
is a common area kept clear enough so an emergency vehicle could get
down it), and it works. Less snowplowing. No special law enforcement
(those now working the traffic squad can deal with more serious crime).
And none of the salt into the environment, because they can use chains.
Without the salt, and with that little wear, I bet those roads will last
just about forever.
>Dave - what did you think of the bike tax to pay for bike trails?
I think that's a possibility (though "by revolution" is intentionally
silly). If we stopped subsidizing auto users, other taxes could be
lower, and bicycle riders would save there.
> Maybe we could go back to my ridiculous comment earlier this week about bike
drawn emergency vehicles.
Well, a bike isn't going to cut it for an ambulance or a fire engine.
But cops on bikes, we even have those now!
I just wanted to put out a word of peace as the first poster suggests.
I think there may be unnecessary confusion of culture happening here.
Minneapolis is a city that heavily PROMOTES BIKING. I don't like that Critical
Mass is being seen by authorities as an anarchist event needing to be beat
back. Critical Mass is (was?) a peaceful bike culture event which flows within
Minneapolis traffic. It is NOT a training ground for GOP riot police.
Can everyone please exercise some coolness and take a breath?
I'm tired of good people getting hurt at civic gatherings. And I really don't
want this dumb convention coming up to get violent.
a WORD for the Police, please serve the PEACE.
Ray W. Rolfe
Minneapolis
Ray Rolfe wrote:
> I think there may be unnecessary confusion of culture happening here.
Minneapolis is a city that heavily PROMOTES BIKING. I don't like that Critical
Mass is being seen by authorities as an anarchist event needing to be beat
back. Critical Mass is (was?) a peaceful bike culture event which flows within
Minneapolis traffic. It is NOT a training ground for GOP riot police.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
The more I read about this thing, the more I disagree that Critical Mass
is a peaceful bike event. They seem to portray themselves as a an
exuberant bunch of kids showing us how much fun it is to travel in a
crowd of bikers. Sounds great to me.
At first I bought off on this. But then I found out that they schedule
these events at rush hour in downtown, and purposefully slow down car
traffic (see Kersten's column and a few comments made by posters to this
List). That is, the bikers are being confrontational and antagonistic
to anyone driving a car. They depend on Minnesota Nice to keep the
motorists from attacking them. If they tried this in Chicago, there'd
be some maimed bikers out there.
And yet this event seems to be almost sponsored by the city; apparently
the cops just let them block traffic at whim. Almost makes me ashamed
to ride a bicycle.
I think Mark has hit the nail on the head here. The way I see it is a bunch
of rabble-rousers who intentionally push the line. This time they went over
it.
Civil disobedience has, for the most part, been aimed at those who
perpetrate the wrong (lunch counters, schools, sit-ins, etc). CM isn't about
civil disobedience. It's about being lawless and reckless once a month, then
claiming a moral high road when the inevitible happens. It's a power play
that is no different than the kids who block traffic for kicks on Portland
Avenue and environs. Then......... when all hell breaks loose, as it did two
weeks ago, the media blitz of "we're just peaceful
save-the-earth-ride-a-bike young people riding together in protest and
solidarity and we're victims of police ambushes and brutality" occurs.
Sorry, I'm not buying it. It is an intentional attempt to muck up traffic
and disrupt the lives of people who, for whatever reason, choose to drive
cars or must drive cars or have the means to drive cars. I'm not buying the
gee-shucky-darn innocent biker bit.
Mike Thompson
Windom
On Sep 9, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Anderson&Turpin wrote: > If they tried this in Chicago, there'd be some maimed bikers out > there. You are soooooo wrong: http://chicagocriticalmass.org/ There are organized CM events in every major US city and in other countries world wide. Congested cities like Chicago, New York, Boston, San Francisco, etc. that have especially strong CM rides. The characterization of Critical Mass as a mob of lawless thugs is totally nonsensical. I would argue the fact that far more car drivers ignore or break the law every day. For example people driving the posted speed limit are viewed as driving dangerously slow in traffic and suffer the derision of the other so-called "Minnesota nice" drivers. Spend a weekend night down at the Emergency Room at HCMC and you'll see first hand the carnage cause these "Minnesota nice" folks and their cars. > And yet this event seems to be almost sponsored by the city; > apparently the cops just let them block traffic at whim. Is it so hard to believe that there are actually some people in the city government who don't look at protesting as a criminal activity? Would it also shock you so much to learn there are actual bicycling enthusiasts working in the city government? Without people like this we wouldn't have the growing bicycle trail system we have now. Without these people we wouldn't have the new Hiawatha LRT system. In spite of all years of people nay-saying this project, it turned out to be more successful than anyone's wildest dreams and has been an economic boom for the neighborhoods it serves. I would love to see the bike / parkway system and the LRT system expanded all over the metro area, but instead we get more roads, cars, and congestion. Daniel Siskind Windom Park, Minneapolis
Mark Anderson wrote:
> If they tried this in Chicago, there'd be some maimed bikers out there.
I'm sure Chicago Critical Mass would be somewhat surprised to hear
this. Their 10th Anniversary "blowout" ride is 9/28..
Jim McGuire
Como
They not only try it, but regularly ride on the last Friday of each month at rush hour in Chicago as well. http://chicagocriticalmass.org/ There are also critical mass rides in New York City and San Francisco to name a few. I have not ridden with the Mass here yet, but I suspect that you will find all sorts of behaviors ranging from courteous to not courteous because the ride is made up of all sorts of people with little structure and not really any "command and control." One thought occurs however. Riding my bike on Minneapolis streets, while observing all traffic laws, signaling for turns, stopping for red lights,everything I am supposed to do, I can't begin to tell the number of times I have encountered automobile drivers who think it is really cute to come as close as they can to me as if forcing me into the curb, or attempt to startle me by honking their horns when they are close, or in some cases even yell obscenities. Of course the majority do not do those things, but goodness one sure notices the handful that do. I love Minneapolis for her bike trails and bike lanes, her parks, greenways and parkways. We are way ahead of many other cities in this respect. Still there is much that can be done, in consideration for cyclists, mass transit, and automobiles too. If only we can learn to work together on some of these issues. Peace; Jessi (Jessica Wicks) Sheridan, NE Mpls
Minneapolis has done a lot to accommodate bicycles.
Not enough to be sure. Among other things, we need
more bike lanes and those lanes need to be separated
by curbing from automobile lanes. My problem with
Critical Mass is that I believe their tactic of
deliberately irritating motorists is not only likely
not to help get the improvements bicyclists need, but
may very well make it LESS likely the city will make
the needed improvements.
Irritating and inconveniencing the majority of
commuters isn't going to make them receptive to
spending money on the irritants.
On Sep 9, 2007, at 1:25 PM, M Charles Swope wrote:
> Irritating and inconveniencing the majority of
> commuters isn't going to make them receptive to
> spending money on the irritants.
This tactic seems to work just fine for people in cars. The biggest
inconvenience to drivers is the multitude of other people in cars.
Ironically the band-aid solution seems to be make bigger roads to
accommodate even more and more cars.
Daniel Siskind
Windom Park, Minneapolis
I have a friend who taught for a year in a university city in China. He sent a
letter saying he was absolutely blown away that during every rush hour there
were something like a million bicycles on the streets. The number of bicycles
far outnumbered the number of cars, which were in very short supply.
This was a policy issue for China. They did not/do not have the money for super
highways or even a lot of car worthy streets without shorting funding other,
more pressing, projects, like feeding themselves.
Much of Europe was charging the equivalent of $5/gal. for gas even 20 years
ago. This was also defined as a policy issue. They put more of their money into
mass transit initiatives for over a hundred years now.
We put our collective money into infrastructure for automobiles, planes, and
trucks, letting our heavy rail go virtually dormant and not building mass
transit infrastructure in favor of vehicles which require enormous amounts of
unrenewable resources--gasoline--to move. Our policy was/is very short sighted
and we will be paying for the lack of perspicacity for the forseeable future.
Critical Mass is just one small (at least in Minnesota) effort to call
attention to the need for a different perspective on our habits. I don't know
whether their strategy is good or bad, I try never to be on the roads during
rush hour. But given the 80+ postings on this list alone, I'd say they are at
least making some people aware of the issue.
WMarks, Central
I define leadership as the art of transforming a mass of critics into a
critical mass.? In this case,?a critical mass has created a mass of critics.?
Can this contradiction be resolved in a dialectical manner? What a fine test of
art of leadership in Minneapolis!
Arthur T. Himmelman
Loring Park
On Sep 8, 2007, at 3:50 AM, Jennifer Rubenzer wrote:
> Gax tax...paying for what we use.
Jennifer, how many tons does your motor vehicle weight, loaded? The
generally accepted figure for the cost of building and maintaining
highways is over a dime per ton mile. The average car today weights
around two tons loaded, so a ballpark figure of about twenty cents/
mile is about right. Typically the annual license fee recovers maybe
a penny a mile of that, and with a fleet average of about 20 MPG the
gas tax is recovering maybe another 2 cents a mile, and the sales tax
is maybe recovering another cent. So by "farebox recovery" type
measures the average private car is only paying maybe 20% of the
costs it creates- way less than the required transit fairbox recovery
standards for federal funding.
> How about a bike tax? A buck per thousand rotations! I like it.
Not even worth the bother. The typical bicyclist weights 1/10th of a
ton and 9 bicyclists can fit in the space taken by one car. So that
bicyclist is maybe costing us .1 cent per mile, or .12 cents per
thousand rotations of the wheel. If that cyclist had driven a typical
car instead, that trip might have been subsidized by us taxpayers to
the tune of about 16 cents a mile. If that cyclist is riding an hour
a day and covering 10 miles in that time, they're costing us a whole
$7 or so a year- less than the cost of collecting any fee. Our hour a
day cyclist is saving us $700 a year by not burdening our roads with
a two ton vehicle- we could buy them a decent new bike every year and
still be saving the taxpayers money!
Even the LRT is saving a couple bucks in road costs per passenger,
and probably breaking even when you consider that it's saved us from
having to build a multi billion dollar freeway down the Hiawatha
corridor.
>
> Jennifer rubenzer heading to soccer from maple grove
That little intra suburban jaunt just cost us taxpayers a couple
more bucks. And in case you think I'm picking on you, consider that
the 40 ton tractor-trailer rig in the next lane is costing us $4 a
mile, and paying maybe 12 cents a mile in taxes...
totally the real costs in Hawthorne,
Dyna Sluyter
I apologize for the late response, but I just spent the weekend
crisscrossing the Boston metro visiting colleges with my son. We traveled
the whole weekend via the mass transit system, including subways, trains and
busses.
We felt free to go anywhere we wanted. The modes of transit were frequent.
They provided us excellent access within the city as well as into
surrounding towns/suburbs. We even had the chance to stretch our legs and
have some healthy walks from our stop to our destination. Fortunately the
weather cooperated, so that did offer a positive experience.
After these past two days, I have to admit it felt strange last night
returning to my car at the airport and hitting the road. I instantly felt
isolated. Rather than commuting with strangers who I literally rubbed up
against and looked at face-to-face, I was now contained inside of my steel
vessel of a automobile. It was like each individual I now encountered was
wearing steel clothing with brand labels like Nissan, Ford, Jeep and Audi.
And I could no longer see the eyes of those I was traveling among.
Automobiles are engineered to provide a sense of privacy and comfort.
Six-speaker surround sound, plush contoured seating, climate control, cup
holders and even refrigerators, elaborate electronic dashboard controls, DVD
players, and practically sound-proof interior environments. These are all
considered a part of an ultimate driving experience. What they suggest,
whether or not each and everyone can afford them all, is that the best way
to travel is in a secluded and controlled environment that nests the driver
and riders from the harsh and perhaps even dangerous realities of the
outside. But as I experienced this weekend, the outside is not so harsh when
you are a part of it. That's what I meant by psychological engineering.
> The generally accepted figure for the cost of building and maintaining
> highways is over a dime per ton mile. The average car today weights
> around two tons loaded, so a ballpark figure of about twenty cents/
> mile is about right. Typically the annual license fee recovers maybe
> a penny a mile of that,
I've often wondered why our license fee isn't by weight but by price.
> I apologize for the late response, but I just spent the weekend
> crisscrossing the Boston metro visiting colleges with my son. We traveled
> the whole weekend via the mass transit system, including subways, trains and
> busses.
No one would ever travel to boston if they had to drive. The single
worst city to try and drive a car in.
John Harris
webber-camden
Like Steve Kotvis, I was so disapointed by some of the posts in this thread that I had to leave Minneapolis on a mission to experience and obtain evidence of ways to design communities around people rather than around automobiles. (Also like Steve, I had other motives. Steve needed to visit colleges with his son and I had a research trip scheduled for work that just so happened to be about this very subject of transportation systems and designing urban areas around people rather than around cars.) I'm writing from the Cherry Street Coffee House in Belletown, Seattle. Make no mistake, the car is still king (er, congestion is still king I should say) here in King County, but the very hilly city of Seattle (these hills rival those of San Fransisco) are well populated with bicyclists and buses while Seattle's first light rail line is under construction. Seattle is well known for taking back space from the automobile in order to give it back to people in the form of wider sidewalks for pedestrians and space on the road for bicyclists. Seattle is the national leader in Road Diets (converting four lane arterial streets to three lane configurations that afford additional space for pedestrians and bicyclists while calming traffic and improving flow and safety for all users including motorists). I invite folks following this discussion to visit my Flickr account where I have begun posting photo documentation on urban design in Seattle. There's even some evidence of me kayaking (another form of human powered transport) on Lake Union on Saturday: http://www.flickr.com/photos/voidoid21/sets/72157601952328157 I'm not finished yet and I'll be taking the Amtrak to Portland, OR on Wednesday where I will continue to document. In Portland, OR we'll see a city that is well on its way to freeing itself from the invasion of the automobile. Portland has a mature rail transit system including multiple Light rail lines and a local streetcar line with extensions on the way. Portland is also the national leader in the use of innovative bicycle facilities that create safe space on the streets to bike resulting in more bicycles, fewer cars, reduced congestion and less air pollution. Like Steve while in Boston, we have found no need for an automobile in Seattle although we did take a ride in a car one time to experience the congestion on I5 on an early Saturday evening. (As an aside for folks who don't know us, my partner and I live car-free in Minneapolis without problems at present. And yes, we even hold jobs and have a social life to boot!) Minneapolis (and many members of the Minneapolis Issues Forum) has much to learn. I'm happy to help out with this necessary learning experience. Stay tuned in for more. Matty Lang, Midtown Phillips, writing from Seattle where its sunny and 78 degrees
I won't comment on the public v. automobile v. bicycle mode of
transportation, but insofar as being disappointed by some of the posts
in this thread, I sent this thread to an acquaintance in Oklahoma City
who is very interested in bicycle / automobile issues and he was very
impressed by the intelligent level of discourse regarding the Critical
Mass incident. Of course having an excellent list moderator helps, but
sometimes I think we in Minneapolis sell ourselves short.
Bill Dooley
Kenny
Need help? Please contact technical support. To support your forum, please donate.
Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using GroupServer.