As a veteran of Metro Council (our elected regional planning authority) — including a seven-year stint as president from 2003 to 2010 — David Bragdon has been around the block when it comes to Oregon transportation politics. And for the past decade he's been executive director of TransitCenter, a nonprofit foundation that funds and conducts research and advocacy to improve public transit across the U.S. Before that he led a planning office for former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Suffice it to say, Bragdon has a mix of experiences in advocacy and government that I feel BikePortland readers could learn a lot from. So when I heard he was leaving his post at TransitCenter and was making a stop in Portland to visit family, I figured it was a perfect time to invite him into the Shed for an interview.

We ended up talking about a range of issues including: how advocates can influence government, what PBOT should look for in their hiring of a new director, PBOT's budget woes, why he doesn't trust ODOT (which he refers to as the Oregon State Highway Department), TriMet and transit governance, and more.

Links:

• David Bragdon Wikipedia entry
• ODOT suffers from incompetence and dishonesty at highest levels, former Metro President says (BikePortland, 2015)
• A People's History of Recent Urban Transportation Innovation (Transit Center, 2016)
• Winning Transit (TransitCenter, 2019)

David Bragdon 0:00

My biggest regret of being in office for 12 years was was having basically gone along with things on promises that were then broken and the pattern of broken promises at the Oregon State Highway Department is just too long to ignore.

Jonathan Maus 0:23

David Bragdon 1:39

Hey, it's good to be here.

Jonathan Maus 1:40

Before we get started, I wonder if you can just share just so folks get to know you a little better. Just describe sort of your relationship to mobility like you know, what impact has transportation had sort of on your life? Were you biking around neighborhoods as a kid are driven everywhere? You know what, what's sort of your story and in relationship to transportation, you know, through your life.

David Bragdon 2:00

I was born in New York City. So my family did not have a car till we moved to Portland. I was 12 when we moved to Portland. So that was the first time we actually had a car. So I grew up taking the bus and the subway everywhere. And by the time I was seven or eight I was doing that by myself. Around so high degree of independence kind of came with with with that. And that's been just part of my lifestyle, my whole life and became a both a personal interest and professional interest. I think there's some something very primitive I just like big things that move. And I also love cities and I love urbanity and transportations a key part of that.

Jonathan Maus 2:46

How about these days? How do you How are you getting around? So you assume you take the subway a lot? Take the bus a lot. Do much biking at all. You know,

David Bragdon 2:53

I have to say that I don't like very much. I will admit that. Just curious. Just curious. So okay, but you've met the last time you and I saw each other think in person. You were in our apartment in Brooklyn, right? And we had some transportation experiences you and I

Jonathan Maus 3:10

it was fascinating to watch. This was Hurricane Sandy whipped through right? There was this like mass mobilization of of transit, because the subways were flooded. Were in your apartment, whatever floor that was looking down on the floor, these 27th floor these platoons of buses coming in, it was the most fascinating like triage and how

David Bragdon 3:30

Jonathan Maus 5:05

Yes true. Just can ask sort of something that brings you to Portland. Are you here for the Pbot? Director, job interview? Perhaps

David Bragdon 5:12

Oh, God, no. I wouldn't be hired. I wouldn't be hired. So no, no, no, I think I'm I'm, you know, I think I'm temperamentally an is probably always the case, but suppressed a little bit during the 30 or 40 years. And I temperamentally I'm a New Yorker, you know, and it's like, kind of interested in making things happen. So, I may be a little too blunt about something. So I don't think I'd be a very strong candidate to be hired around here. But

Jonathan Maus 5:44

okay, I'll I mean, that's a little bit of a insult to Portland. Oh, no pace of change. I think. I feel that is, you know,

David Bragdon 5:51

everybody's everybody's got their role to play. I'm really, I like doing what I do on sort of on the advocacy side. Well, speaking

Jonathan Maus 6:01

of that, you just, I thought I read that you were moving on from Transit Center did that for 10 years. So what are you doing now? First, actually, can you just share with us what you did at transit center? Yeah. So back at well, are what it is, as well, Trent,

David Bragdon 6:13

Jonathan Maus 7:43

Speaking of both those things, you've been in an elected official, you've been in this advocacy role. You've had quite an interesting background, career wise. I wonder just if I can just ask you a question just about, you know, your thoughts on the relationship between advocacy and activism, sort of citizen advocacy, and government, government advocacy, something I often hear from City Hall offices and agency offices is, you know, we can't do XYZ thing, because we need the community to support it. Right. And then I'll often say, and I'll often hear other activists say, it'd be great to have an elected leader, or a staffer that would come out and push for something, right. So it's like both sides are wanting the other side to sort of put their neck out first. Can you share anything about just like, how you see that dynamic? And that balance of like, civic advocacy versus advocacy coming from government?

David Bragdon 8:36

That was a really exciting time when he came and had Janette Sadik, Khan, and all kinds of things in the street. That was great. But that's

the other. That's the other really, I think, really essential ingredient as well, is staff, that staff that really does get it and having the elected leaders who will empower their staff, and, and have their back to do the right thing. And you know, and I think it's on the staff side, I think is where Portland retains its advantages. I mean, there's, you know, there's a lot of falter on what and blah, blah, blah, leadership in Portland, and I think people are too hard on themselves in Portland is, is too hard on itself. And in terms of its self image these days, I mean, the last couple of years, but it's enduring strength is, is really the staff of some of these agencies who are really, really been putting out could work now for 2030 years, and continue to, and that, to me is an it's one of many underlying strengths that Portland has. That rarely gets credit.

When you were talking about Michael Bloomberg, having the luxury of his own finances to sort of do whatever he wants. I was laughing because I remember when those days were happening. And there was all this, it seemed like all this dynamism and all these new projects going in street public space project bike projects, Janette Sadik, Khan was doing, and when we would, we would mention those things to Portland leaders and Portland staff. The response I heard many times was like, hey, you know, New York City's got a tax base that we just can't compete with. I mean, they have tons of money. So hearing you talk about Bloomberg, it's funny, because it wasn't just that they had a bigger budget, but the actual, you know, mayor of the city had a bigger budget personally, which is partly how that was able to happen. So he

was willing to use his political capital, as it were. I mean, there are small as you know, as you know, I mean, there are small, modest towns that are doing some bold things. And that comes from leadership, right? It's not necessarily the size of the budget. But it's again, it was Jeanette, Jeanette was able to persuade Bloomberg in terms that he understood, and he cared about their things that clearly push his buttons, the economy of the city. The urban design is very interesting to him. Public health is a personal interest of his and Janette made him see in a persuasive, factual way that that biking, walking was a public health issue. And that rang a bell with him, and that it's an urban design issue that rang a bell with him. He's also a big supporter of parks. And so all that were things he could relate to. And he then empowered her. And then when she ran into the predictable and same old, kind of naysayers, he had her back in it said this, he she is my transportation Commissioner, and it was, you know, he backed her to the hilt. She was, you know, they were also astute about leading with things that are pumped safe routes for seniors, right, well, who votes who's most likely to turn out and vote it seniors, and being able to have the narrative of your grandmother being able to cross the street up in Washington Heights, and, you know, it became not just the data, but also the narrative. And so then they were able to accomplish, you know, a ton of stuff.

I hear you saying that, and it reminds me of the importance of, of an ecosystem and getting these things, if these things done, you need the the mayor, this the the agency staff, the strong civic sector. I wonder, you know, what you think about each of those in Portland right now. I mean, let's just talk about can you say anything about the civic sector, I want to remind folks that one of the coolest things that I appreciated the transit center published in the last few years was the the 20 in 2015, the People's History of Transportation Innovation, I think you were like the lead author, one of the main authors of that it was like 80 page report. Really excellent. I'll have it in the show notes for people to look at. I think everybody should read it. Still very relevant. That one of the quotes one of the one of the key takeaways was without a civic sector that can direct public support, Urban Transportation Innovation will not reach its potential. So I'm just curious, you know, if you can say anything about how you think sort of The health of Portland civic sector in this moment.

I mean, there's very few government agencies that just wake up in the morning and say, How do I change it really, most of the time does come from from outside. And that's also thanks for that reference to the 2015 report. There's also 2019. One we did called Winning transit, winning transit, also on our website, and really talks about how groups organized to influence government and get transportation improvements. And so that that has, that's really been fundamental in most of the places that we see,

I know that you're very well, you're very aware of Portland's history, given that us live here, and you're an elected official here, and especially this sort of what I think are, in some ways, sort of the heyday going back to the 70s 80s, the, the Tom McCall era. And when we sort of like planted those seeds of like the neighborhood activism that would sort of germinate and then build some of this amazing stuff that we're still known for. Granted, that's 50 years ago, but do you think there's been a void in Portland civic sector from sort of the erosion of the neighborhood associations and the sort of introduction of the idea of NIMBYs or people like that? Do you feel that sort of Portland's vontade neighborhood associations have had their influence or potential influence erode a little bit? And do you think there's a gap there now, where they used to fill?

I don't follow it here closely enough, but if their influence has been eroded, I think that's not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, I think that 1970s style, civic engagement based predicated solely on on institutions, like neighborhood associates, probably has outlived its usefulness in that the most places. And I again, I don't know, the all the specifics here, but it's certainly true in New York City. It's true in most of California, that these semi quasi official sort of neighborhood associations or whatever they happen to be called, tend to be, you know, over represented of older residents, of homeowners, white people, they're, they're basically the people who have time to spend on this. And so there's an inherent conservatism not conservatism in the sense of, you know, right, left conservative, but conservatism relative to change. So I think the, the, the engagement has to be in other forms now, because the, you know, what, what the neighborhood associations, you know, become very good at blocking things, which in the case, you know, is blocking the Mount Hood freeway from tearing out 101% of the houses in south in Southeast Portland. So that's probably a good thing that they, they mobilized to stop that. But if

they can block that they can also back in the parking lot,

not being able to have a duplex neighborhood. That's, you know, that's just sort of selfishness. But yeah, so that part may be short of broken and there needs to be, you know, some new, new forms of engagement,

maybe in replays of that. That segment of the feedback loop has arisen social media and the ability for citizen activists to have more power.

I mean, I don't know that social media is any more representative than a neighborhood associate. It's just represented for you miss, unrepresentative in a different way? Yeah, I would say one, you know, one thing about transportation advocacy and in Portland from what I do understand from 3000 miles away is that there is definitely a a fraying of the breadth of the coalition, particularly with regard to the business world, not necessarily playing a very constructive role here, which is very different from what we see elsewhere. The employers in downtown Seattle, granted, these are some major companies. Again, I don't necessarily agree with Amazon on everything in terms of like minimum wage, or probably other things I might not agree with, but they understand the importance of transit for their downtown, their location, Microsoft, East eastern part of that region, the the the businesses in Seattle are like 100%, all in on transit, and they are leaders in ballot measures, their leaders in the campaign, they they they work really hard Chicago, commercial Club of Chicago, what's their number one issue is like, get the CTA working again, you know, improve transit partnership of for New York, which is like the major companies that get that, like Midtown Manhattan or lower Manhattan does not work without transit. And so they are like, in the forefront of the fight for trans Bay Area Council. I mean, every major city businesses are very transit supportive. My understanding is that's no longer really the case here in Portland the that there's just sort of a wall on these issues. So that's that which was not the case here in obviously in the 1970s. Or, you know, when sort of the foundations were laid for what you have here today.

Yeah, interesting. I, I've heard a bit about that, too. There was, you know, of course, you might recall, Metro tried to put together a transportation funding package couple years ago that failed at the ballot. And I was able to read the people that put that together and created sort of an autopsy about sort of like what went wrong. And that is one of the things that they'd mentioned, was it sort of the fractious nature of the coalition that people around the measure thought would be there didn't turn out to be there. And that was one of the things they listed is that some of the businesses weren't just a wall, but were actively fighting? Right, the measure? So yeah. So yeah, go back to the Transportation Innovation report. Another thing you said in there, which is very relevant to what's happening now, was that the quote from the report was a bold mayor, and transportation agency head who have both the courage to create the vision for a different kind of city and the management skills to compel their staff to do things differently are essential for the successful implementation of any change. So right now, Pbot, is hiring a new director. And I just wonder, you know, actually, some of the people involved in that hire might be listening to this. And I just wonder if you would have any advice or insights for them in terms of what kind of person they should look for, for that position?

Well, I think, you know, what we're writing about in that report to her sort of periods of reform and redirection, where you're trying to really take an organization or an agency in a in an in a new direction. And that that sort of impulse from the top is very important, I think I think Portland's at a different stage, in the sense that, that the staff in many of the transportation that well, Pbot, in particular, or Treiman, that they're professionals in those agencies who haven't on the right trajectory, and who want to do the right thing, and no actually have the technical skills to do that. And that would not have been the case 2030 years ago. And the same is true at New York City do T today, I mean, that there are people that Jeanette hired. And, you know, now, you know, multiple generations, almost of them, people who've kind of come up through the systems that she helped to instill. And despite the fact that succeeding the current commissioner is, I can say this diplomatically, is not as strong a commissioner as I are, you might like in terms of these issues. But that matters less at this point in history, because the agency is staffed with people who do get it. And what's my sense with with p bar is that it is staffed with people who do get it and they know the right things to do and have the skills to do it. I do think, a director and a commissioner. And then ideally, when you know, when you change the system, I think that adds in 20, whatever, 2024 or whatever. And you're going to have a city manager instead of the kind of fractured different bureaus, that adds a whole new level of potential, you know, in terms of professionalization, and support and institutionalization of, of sort of across the bureaus. But anyway, I mean, I think you'd want to have a director that, you know, will back that staff, make sure they have the tools they need, technically, financially, and to also to, to stand up to naysayers and, you know, let them let the let them continue to reform the streets and put the put safety first and the other things that are on what is really a good agenda, but just not moving fast enough. I think that's what a what strong leadership can do can expedite a good, good agenda.

Yes, I hear you about not moving fast enough. And the need to sort of do more, more quickly. I think if right,

I think that's yes, I think that is that's that can be a characteristic around here.

Yeah. And I think if you talk to, if you talk to staff, people, or people at city hall, they might talk about, hey, we have no money. And, you know, I'm of two minds, I think I can understand that. I mean, there's a factual thing where you look at the budget numbers, and they're not great. The director of offices office of management and finance at a recent city council work session on asset management, looked in the face of the city commissioner Mingus maps, who's in charge of Pbot and said, basically, I have some bad news. Pbot is going out of business. Because Commissioner maps is new to the job and so he's sort of like leveling with him on how bad things are at Pima This is Director of osmf Office of Management and finance saying that he's looked at the numbers and he thinks P bots going out of business, given how you understand things are going in Portland and sort of the dynamic there. How they could get out of that hole revenue wise.

Well, I've got kind of a rhetorical I mean, the answer to that in the sense of I, and I have this I felt this way when I was at Metro council to that, that the the company You know, oh, woe is us. We don't have it. Well, there's never enough, you know, I'm just tired of, you know, I think people want to hear what are you doing with what you have, right. And I think the transportation industrial complex is really overly invested in this whole, like, woe is us, we don't have enough money, we don't have enough money. And I don't think that for us necessarily is true for one thing, in all cases, and it's not very persuasive to, you know, ask the voters for more, I think you gotta try to build on success and say, We're doing well with what we have. Now, this is I think, where governance comes in that, and the sort of parochial nature of these different agencies and their different pockets of of money is that, in fact, there is a lot of money in the transportation system, it's just in the wrong hands being spent on the wrong things. So there's a bit of a cognitive dissonance in my head, when I hear at one level of government, you know, people saying we don't have enough money to do these good things that people actually want to have done. While in the very same city, very same geography, you have another level of government in the state of Oregon, that's willing to blow billions of dollars on things that are bad, that are demonstrably bad, they are widening urban highways, which will invariably induce more traffic, and dirty the air and make socio economic equity worse. And so you have to take a look at what's being spent overall, in terms of what people are paying in terms of their gas taxes, or the other forms of revenue that go into transportation. And you really have to overhaul the governance so that the money can go to things that really do benefit people and the structure now, it prevents that hence, you have a city government, claiming they're in poverty, and in relative terms, they actually are compared to other levels of government, even though I think claiming poverty is not a very effective thing to do for a government that wants to attract more funding. But anyway, that aside, get to look at it more systemically.

So to answer that question around sort of like what advice you might have for finding a new leader of Pbot. If I hear you write you the answer to that would sort of be somebody who can change the narrative from scarcity of funding to saying, we need to innovate and do different things with the money. So it can go further. Is that kind of what you're saying? Well,

and what are the outcome? What are the societal out, you know, how's how's your life going to be better? As a result of more or different, different spending? So it's a value proposition rather than a plea? of poverty? It's more like, here's what we can do.

Yeah, I think I guess what I'm, what I'm trying to get at is this, we're sort of stuck in this thing of the government saying we don't have money to do the stuff y'all want to do, which they they'll say that a lot, too, I guess everyone, but usually, the activists that are talking to them are saying, let's reform, let's do things differently. Let's not serve as so many car trips all the time, which is really expensive. And the government saying we don't have money for that. So we're stuck in this place between the politics not being right to make that shift to not keep putting good money after bad. Right. So I just wonder if you have any, any advice? I feel like this is like a therapy session. Do you have any advice for a city that's like, you know, they agree with you that the staff down down there are great, they know, they have the plans and the skill to do to reform the streets and to make them you know, work differently. The wrinkle is the politics of just sort of getting us over that hurdle, right to be able to stand up and say, Hey, we're running out of money, because our system caters to driving too much. I think maybe you don't agree with that. I feel like that's a fact. Not your opinion. Yeah. And so in order for us to get out of this hole financially, if they say, we're just going to charge you more to drive that's going to be very politically tough.

Because that's just punitive. That's not talking about benefits. That sounds punitive. Yeah. So

I'm saying like, how do we get to the point where they can not just say that, but also say, sort of The Straight Dope of saying, if we keep supporting the most expensive behavior, this is not going to go away? It's only going to get worse. So help us support something that's not driving help us support other things? And we'll get out of this kind of together. Is that is that even feasible? Like, I feel like we can't we got to get over this. The sticking point here.

Yeah, I would say that, you know, maybe a way to put it as you know, what we've been doing in this country for 60 or 70 years has not been working and just doubling down on, you know, what we've been doing and continuing to widen the roads is not going to do it. I think the the additional leap is to get beyond where most actually even progressive Democrats are, which is they're still in the mindset of, well, it's all of the above, you know, and we can do all of these things that are going to create all kinds of construction jobs and I think That is actually the bigger challenge in in the sense that really reorienting the priorities is is key.

Yes, that's That's

right. Yeah. So you'd have, you know, Peter De Fazio. To his great credit really was reform minded in the legislation that he proposed in the last reauthorization. Last was it last year now guess is your before. And but the Senate Democrats, including the two from Oregon, including the two from New York, you know, it's very much a status quo. And doesn't matter how liberal Bernie Sanders is, or Chuck Schumer, how dependent Chuck Schumer's constituents are on transit, or Jeff Merkley cares a lot about climate, but those senators really didn't support change. They weren't they're still in the all of the above, let's just throw more money at highways and oh, here's some for transit too.

Yeah. And related to that you mentioned where where the money is currently going. And this sort of like I hear it saying all the above, like we can do a mega project, as long as it's got low bikepath. On the side, we're all good. I think you and I both agree. That's, that's a red flag when we hear that and we get nervous. So on. I'm going to I'm going to sort of shift here into talking a little bit about these mega projects. I can't not when I have you in the room. The you know, ODOT, like you mentioned is still working on to let's just take two really big ones they've got they've got more, and I'm sure you love their office of reach of their Office of Urban Mobility since you you've been so public for years saying that they have no business in urban transportation or

Norwell. George Orwell right, that Office of Urban Obliteration says what it should be.

So just focus on just two of them, which I know you know, well that they call it now the Interstate bridge replacement program, which to me is really gross that they call it program and not project I feel like that's part of the spin. But regardless, it's all spin when you're around it was called the Columbia River Crossing. Now it's called the the ABR

cinnamal. Soup. Yeah, mold soup, different bowl,

and also the five rows. CodeProject. So speaking of, you know, Democrats and palate

student use the word improvement. That's another their favorites now. Yes. Thank you for not doing not falling for that one.

No, I'm definitely not not doing that. You know, we do have some Democratic some people we'd expect to be progressive, obviously, around these projects in Portland, they've had varying degrees of success installing it or not. But for all intensive purposes, no one's really stood up against this thing in a big way that in an elected office, that really matters. I mean, metros supported money for it. City, Portland, supports the project and sort of a willing, I wouldn't say a willing partner, they're a reluctant partner, but they certainly haven't shut it down. One of the things that's emerging from it is this idea that you can right size, one house representative down in Salem, in particular representative Khan, fam, who I think is doing some great work around some transportation issues. She's been pretty vocal about ODOT in general, and these projects, but she is in the camp of saying, you know, we can right size this and I think even some advocacy groups are talking about right size. Do you think that's possible? Do you think it's possible to sort of work in good faith with ODOT and right size some of these mega projects? Or is it a better tact? Just say, heck, no, we're not. We're not gonna move forward on these at all.

Wow, there's a lot there. And I from what I've heard, Representative Pham, I think she's the first legislature legislator I've heard of in the time I was here since who really gets this issue. So it's so important to have somebody in state government who's perceives things the way way she does. But that's a side come. So your question? Well, you know, it is not it's not possible to work in good faith with Oregon State Highway Department because they don't work in good faith with you. So my biggest regret of being in office for 12 years was was having basically gone along with things on promises that were then broken, and the pattern of broken promises at the Oregon State Highway Department is just too long to ignore.

I'm really, I'm sorry, I'm grinning, because you say Oregon State Highway Department.

That is actually that is what it let's just call it call it what it is. It's not an aspersion. I mean, the Oregon needs a good highway department, every state should have a State Highway Department state highways are an important thing. But let's not pretend they're the, you know, when when an organization if you look at the headcount, the budget that mean this isn't always going to be that and again, there's nothing wrong with it, just have it be that and then other things can be done by other people who are good at doing the other things and then then maybe the highway department can actually get good at doing what they should do, which is highways. So can Yes Can these could these projects be right sized? Absolutely. If there were creative people who would like for example, understand induced demand. I mean, the The idea that Mr. Strickler the head of the highway department doesn't believe in induced demand. I mean, the guys living in 1956 May the world is flat, too. If that's that's your attitude. Other states, they're in certainly in the engineering profession. They do understand that size matters to coke quota phrase that that these can be right size. And the pricing is so important, which is another thing that ODOT is totally obscure and in denial and has total lack of sophistication about is, is the pricing that's the real huge missed opportunity in all this because something and this is something they said, you know, something needs to be done. The problem is they want to do something it's gonna make things worse, but it's not an acceptable situation today you have bridges that are built in an earthquake zone. Some of the pilings are what you know, it's it's outmoded, has insufficient transit, insufficient biking, the the it is bad for Hayden island. So yes, there's something needs to be done in that quarter, something good could be done in that quarter that adds transit that adds more safer biking, that is good for Hayden Island, good for downtown Vancouver. And that introduces pricing. So yeah, that that definitely be done with the right. Leadership. The problem is that part of their propaganda machine too, is to say that anybody who suggests that is a negative naysayer, and they just keep repeating their line while we have to do something. And and I never, never disagree, of course, we should do something. But look, it's them that's wasted, what 1520 years actually producing nothing.

Sort of on that note, I'm going to assume that to focus on the i five rows quarter, in particular that I can see ODOT you know, if they were in this room, or if they were responding to this, they would say we've already right sized it, we're only doing auxiliary lanes. Do you think the public should trust that? I mean, they keep saying, you know, this isn't only just on off ramps, these aren't really widening? Actually, they don't want to say the word widening. I mean, I think it's hard for some degree for the public to grasp that. They might not be getting the truth from ODOT. And I find myself when I use words like propaganda, and other things, which I feel are accurate sometimes with the way they handle these things. People can dismiss me as just being sort of like extreme and being anti to anti car anti freeway. But I mean, do you think it's Is that what's going on? Do you think people should question, you know, OData assertion that they're not really doing a big expansion project in the Rose quarter? Well, of

course, it's an expansion, of course, it's a widening of the highway. And they have their clever propaganda terms to obscure that. But you know, the the record is pretty clear. I want to get back to your question, though, about elected official, I totally relate to where they are. And I totally understand people run for office because they want to get things done. If they're good at political office, they, they want to collaborate, they want to negotiate, they want to reach some good outcome. So I don't think any any, anybody in office in this region, who is engaging constructively trying to make things happen, is necessarily being duped or they're in cahoots with the pavers, are there anything like that there? They are actually acting in good faith. And I think that's how I was too. But I will now with benefit of hindsight, say, Well, I was duped. I was, I was lied to by OData. You know, and I regret having accepted that. But it's an understandable impulse on the part of anybody in office, that they want to kind of try to reach compromises. And that's my by and large, that's to their credit, the problem is that they're bargaining with the devil and being taken advantage of, and not being told the full story.

Yes, I hear you on that for sure. Okay, um, shifting gears a little bit to transit. We've covered transit more and more just because it's such a huge component of what's going on. So it's something that our readers are super into knowing more about, of course, I wonder if you can share some thoughts about what you think the way forward is for transit after sort of the the beatings, it's taken from COVID. And then, especially here in Portland, but I don't think we're unique, also, from people's perception that it's unsafe and that you know, the amount of crime that's happening on public transit, like what's the way forward out of this moment?

I think Portland has a lot of there are a lot of good things about transit in Portland and again, that it maybe goes unrecognized, maybe a little national perspective on this that Portland has done some things steadily li for a long time very well, and you know, fairly some fairly specialized but fundamental things. And one has been the frequency on on the bus network and focusing on some high frequency CT I mean, robust kind of frequent network and I got here Saturday night, Sunday morning, I was going to stay on it 33rd and 34th and Morrison, so I was staying at 34th and Morrison want to go to actually church, a friend of mine was a pastor in North Portland and Sunday morning, you know, nine o'clock in the morning, both those line fit 915. And that line for both running like 15 minute headways, which is really phenomenal. I mean, you don't find that in a whole lot of other cities that, that that focus on the weekend service, the evening service. And, and trimed has continually done that and even while it gets, you know, national press or maybe more notice for having built light rail, and again, kind of steady, steady growth there is that focus on the fundamentals with the bus system is really to Portland's credit. And so I think there are lessons there in terms of recovering from from from the pandemic, all our research shows, and I think the experience through the pandemic of reorienting transits and transportation planning generally from the expectation that it's all about nine to five workers, which was a fallacy anyway, that was really over emphasized anyway. But thinking about transit more in terms of multiple purpose trips, and the seven day a week, Eve evening type service service workers coming in later, maybe people that yeah, trips from from multi multiple purposes. So I think that, you know, less focus on the conventional nine to five office workers is actually an overdue change in terms of transportation

planning. So but in general, you're a fan of treatment, right? Like in general,

in general, I think that, that, again, this is sort of like Pbot, in the sense that, that there is there are some things that are now in the DNA of the people who work there at the staff level, that is very sound and that there are certain things that they know how to do, and they have done well, and you know, continually holding up that frequency on the bus network would be one, what trimed has done with fare collection with the use of data use of data in planning. Again, I think a national leader, something people here may not know a lot about, but in terms of, you know, sort of public recognition, but is something that is nationally recognized by other professionals around the country. Project Delivery is another one that TriMet generally has been way above average and delivering things on time on budget. So I think, at the working staff level, that that time it's pretty sound organization, and that that is true, regardless of leadership. You know, that is true, kind of general managers come and go, but the sort of the professionalism of the paperwork, I think they've, they seem to be getting ahead of the driver shortage and understanding compensation of drivers. I think they're they may be ahead of other agencies on that as well.

What about accountability, specifically, issues like enforcement on on on transit, or the cost of fares going up? There's a sense among some activist groups in Portland, that there's a lack of accountability on TriMet. And it's structurally true, there's not necessarily, you know, a publicly appointed board or anything like that. What do you make of the idea that gets floated every now and again, that Metro should take over the regional transit transit system? So, you know, put Metro under sorry, so put TriMet under Metro What do you think of that idea?

I think it would make it much more accountable. And I think that that while I while I really laud trimas, the professional the staff level, I think the the leadership level, it's is problematic due to the lack of accountability. And you know, basic principle 101 of sort of good governance is that those who are most affected, those who pay the bills are our that's who should be in charge. So who pays for TriMet? Well, it's the people who live in this region, who pay the payroll tax and who pay the fares. And while that is enabled by the state, it is not a statewide revenue source, it is a revenue source in this region and most effects this region, and those are the people who should be in charge through there locally. And regional, regional, really regionally elected, you have it Metro Council, that does transportation planning, and land use planning. And so absolutely trimed should be under regional control that has not, I mean, it made sense when Tom McCall was the governor that he and the other the other governor that we don't mention who As a mayor, you all had a real agenda around transit, Barbara Roberts has actually, to her credit, the last governor of this state who really knew or cared about transportation. And so the idea that there the board should be appointed by a governor, you know, and then confirmed by state senators from burns, or Klamath Falls absolutely makes zero sense. And it's not fiscally responsible, because because those entities in Salem, they're not the ones actually pass the all they do is enable the revenue, but the revenue is regional. So yes, I think that is that is part of the governance problem of trauma. And you see the same deal with in terms of general manager selection there, like the port of Portland somewhat like ODOT, that it's this old boys club, and that they, unlike Seattle, unlike la Denver, any most transit agencies, when they're looking for a general manager, they'll do a national search. What's the town's outer trimed? Is the reverse, right? It's like, Fred leaves Fred points to Neil. Yeah, set says the board appoint Neil Neil, Neil leaves, he points the ducks, hey, board appoint Doug, they rubber stamp that Doug leaves and said, you know, here's why. They don't do national search, same thing, port of Portland, it's sort of this good old boys club. And I think if you had local accountability, you would find more emphasis on that type of responsive leadership, including, you know, kind of looking, looking for talent, which again, that's what agencies around around the country do. But that's not how it's done here.

To kind of finish the conversation about transit, I can't help but think that it's an absolutely imperative part of the mix that we have to get right in order to really make the kind of transformations that we need to make. And I also can't not think that for so many people. There, there's this accurate perception misperception that it's that it's not safe. Can you share anything about how to move past some of those perceptions that have been exacerbated? After COVID? For sure, with people being fearful of using transit? And how big a deal that is, in terms of like getting the kind of transit share we need?

Well, I think it is if it is a real concern for people and that we do have to address it head on rather than deny that people have anxiety that worries me sometimes that trans advocates want to say, Oh, well, hey, it's also dangerous to drive a car. Well, that's absolutely true. But facts in certain ways don't matter as much as perception. But you have to address that perception. And there's there's no question that certain behaviors on some of the systems are have become more common, and really do need to be addressed that people smoking on the subway, whether it's Philadelphia, or New York, or park, people who who are experiencing mental illness using the system, but it's important, I think, to not put all that on the transit system. And just as I knew, I took people asked me friends in Portland say, oh, you know, what's wrong with Portland? It's like, well, first of all, remember Portland, like it or not, is part of the United States, right. And there's a lot of things happening in our society writ large, that Portland is not immune to. And the same I would say about about transit. And so the way people are behaving in grocery stores is different now than five years ago, or three years ago, the way people are driving is more antisocial and dangerous, and that there are social bonds in our society that have really frayed and transit is not immune to that we saw that during the pandemic, too, is like, Well, why is it that COVID spread in Taiwan, Taipei Metro is less than in certain cities in New York, it's because mask compliance is higher in Taiwan, because the Taipei Metro operates in a society where people really care about each other, just like they change their personalities when they come in the subway. So so, you know, so part of the issue is really that, you know, transit is experiencing that societal sort of decay just like other aspects of our society are. The question is, what do you do about it? That's within the bounds of a transit agency itself. And to us not that the burden should all be on the transit agency, because again, the transit agency is operating in this broader societal context, I think, on issues like enforcement, what we have seen, and we have a good report about this too, called Safety for All we've got a report on just about anything you've asked about. But there's got to be a spectrum of interventions that range from law enforcement there is and this is again, I think, Some advocates get this wrong, there actually is a role for law enforcement, like when somebody's brandishing a knife at women, because they're wearing a hijab, uh, you got to be able to call 911 and have a strong intervention from law enforcement. But law enforcement is not the only answer to every problem. In fact, it's not the answer to most of the problems that actually occur on transit, which are more nuisances, and annoyances rather than crime. And have those sorts of interventions that are unarmed, that are compassionate, that don't treat everything as a crime, to treat crime as a crime, and a very forceful about treating crime as a crime. But they treat homelessness, they treat mental illness as what it actually is. And so that I think, is the most effective, whether you're talking about whether it's on the transit system, or in the parks, or, you know, like I say, outside of grocery store, that our society as a whole, our society as a whole, not just the transportation sector, but our society as a whole has to develop this much wider range and properly funded sorts of responses to the type of social dysfunction that we have, of which crime is only a part.

Okay, I'm going to work in a I'm going to work on a bike question here that's related to transit and related to social social function, something that can improve social dysfunction, which is bicycling. I remember when the bike share system here in Portland, was trying to get its first big federal grant to get launched, which Metro facilitated, there was talk, there was quotes that I love from some local leaders, which called bike share a public transit system, which I liked. That hasn't, I haven't heard that much lately. We don't really talk about it like that. I feel like our system is sort of languished a bit. And as someone who's you know, so familiar with New York City, it's just such an amazing bike share system that is so massive, probably the biggest one in North America. I just wonder, do you think there's more we could do to make bike share more into a public transit system? Even governance speaking? Is there something we could shift in terms of how its operated, that would make it a more sort of like integral part of our transit network beyond just a bunch of bikes, you know, around the city?

I think it's a matter of thinking about how do we enable our citizens to live a carefree lifestyle and recognizing that human beings are not defined by the mode, they predominantly use, they, most people use one mode for one purpose or they you know, doing something else they use use a different mode, and how do these different offerings kind of come together to free them from free the residents from from from car dependence and the onerous financial costs of owning and operating and ensuring a car? So I think, I think you've got to have some other MPOs. And that's, you know, you mentioned Metro Council coordinating the bike share here in, in Portland, that's a good example of an MPO that I think does think that way and, and thinks about how do we how do we get all these kinds of services aligned, there's more to that can be done in terms of fair interchangeability, and, you know, you know, common common payment, that can also make things more easy. New York hasn't gotten to that

will maybe when, when Metro takes over trimed, we can also maybe just throw in BIKETOWN as part of the package and have that be run by Metro as well, sir. David Breggin anything else that you want to share with your, your former town here, your your Portland people?

Well, I was I was like, coming back. I've got a sentimental attachment to Portland probably always will.

I didn't actually want to ask you what's what can you say anything else about what may come after transit center for you?

Oh, yeah, I'm kind of looking around. I don't know. I'd like to get my hands back on sort of project level type work. Probably do some consulting.

Great. Okay. Thanks, David. Yeah. That was former Metro council president and outgoing executive director of transit center, David Bragdon. Be sure to check the show notes for things we mentioned in the episode. Thank you so much for listening. And to all of you who support bikeportland Thank you very much. It's your financial contributions that make our work possible. And if you're not a subscriber yet, please do sign up as soon as you can at bikeportland.org/support. I'm your host, Jonathan Maus. And until next time, I'll see you in the streets.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai