Jonathan Maus: Welcome to the bike Portland podcast.

I'm your host.

Jonathan Maus, two years ago this week, I was in Manhattan covering the Vision Zero Cities conference hosted by the great nonprofit transportation alternatives at a panel discussion titled super sized SUVs, mega trucks and regulatory failure, my kind of panel, one of the speakers made me sit up and take notice.

He railed against feckless leadership that wouldn't improve bus service.

He called for higher taxes on large vehicles that are more prone to kill people, and he spoke about traffic victims and transportation policy with the candor, clarity and conviction you'd expect from an activist, but this wasn't an activist, it was an elected official.

He was a member of the State Assembly of New York named zohran Mamdani.

Yes, the same Mamdani who might very well be New York City's next mayor when the election is over in a few weeks, mamdani's approach to road safety and his ability to communicate his ideas made such an impression on me that I made his comments the focal point of my recap of that panel I published on bike Portland, and ever since his rise in the New York City mayoral race, I've been wanting to go back and re listen to my audio recording of that panel and pull out anything else that I thought was interesting.

I finally got around to doing that, and it turns out there was a lot more worth sharing from his legislation that would have taxed purchases of oversized trucks and SUVs, his nuanced understanding of car culture and how to counteract it, and the strategic political lens he brings to the road safety conversation, it's crystal clear to me that Mamdani brings a lot to the table when it comes to transportation policy.

In this single panel discussion from 2023 he touches on many of the key arguments and issues we talk about, often in road safety advocacy.

In this episode, I'll share highlights from that panel discussion you'll hear mostly from mom, Donnie, but when I felt more context was necessary, I've also included questions andor comments from either the moderator, who is former transportation alternatives Executive Director, Danny Harris, other panelists, or audience members.

Keep in mind that as you listen, this isn't the greatest audio I've ever collected because I only recorded it for my own notes and never expected to share it like this.

I'll start us off with moderator Danny Harris asking Mamdani about the legislation he was working on at the state capitol in Albany.

Zohran Mamdani: I've introduced legislation with state senator Andrew Gounardes that is a vehicle weight based tax bill.

The idea behind it is that the federal government is, in so many ways, a government of inaction when it comes to these crises, and has refused to step up and step in.

And what we have seen from localities like Washington DC is there is a model whereby a municipality can step forward and disincentivize the purchase of vehicles that have a direct link to higher likelihood of killing children and people on the streets.

And so it's up to us to make it clear to New Yorkers that when they go and they purchase a vehicle of a certain size and a certain weight, that that comes with an additional cost, and that cost should be a fiscal cost, not just a moral cost, and that fiscal cost is one that we should create to ensure that New Yorkers understand what they are doing when they are buying that car at the dealership, and that they start to buy smaller and smaller cars.

Because what we have is an industry that is almost entirely unregulated, that is pushing larger and larger vehicles, tying it to notions of masculinity, vehicles that can't even fit inside parking spots, and yet, for some reason, they continue to be allowed to be sold.

We have to make it clear to New Yorkers that there is a cost when you purchase such a vehicle.

And I just want to say one thing, and it is that in some ways, you know, New York is leading in some ways, but we are far behind in many other ways.

And we have to be very clear about that fact that the way this whole ecosystem works, where families have loved ones killed, and then they have to testify again and again and again as to how their loved o ne was killed and what it took.

And we're seeing it now.

We're seeing it and Albany, it's disgusting, and we have a system where I know the highest likelihood of change in my neighborhood is right after someone gets killed, that's when I can get the stop line, that's when I can get the day lighting, that's when I can get the speed bumps.

How is that an acceptable way for government to work?

And yes, we have we have ideas, we have a vision.

They are leading in this country, but we are so far behind on so many things, and we have to make it clear that there is a political consequence for people who understand this as optional, because people are being killed, as you said today, and it is design that is killing them.

I mean, it's ridiculous, so I know that's a bit of a tangent, but I just wanted to say that before we celebrate New York too much of knowing where it is that we are also lagging far, far behind and who that responsibility lies with.

It's not with you.

It's with the mayor, and it's with the governor.

Jonathan Maus: You'll notice throughout this that Mamdani blames current New York City Mayor Eric Adams several times.

So it's going to be sort of interesting when Mamdani finds himself in that same hot seat in the next few weeks.

The discussion then turned to how city planners and policymakers should respond to the growth in the size of vehicles on the road.

One of the panelists was Alex Engel from NACTO, which is the National Association of city transportation officials.

He responds by talking about road design.

And Mamdani uses the question to share his view on how state power can influence free markets,

Alex Engel: but there are, you know, some mechanisms you can use, like narrowing lanes, by far the most effective thing that you can do, making sure that turns are tighter using real concrete concrete barriers.

So Street design, yes, but also vehicles.

Zohran Mamdani: The state has a role in incentivizing the way in which the market acts.

If the state puts additional costs on certain sizes of vehicles, then I think that it creates an opening for there to be smaller vehicles with the understanding that charge is not associated anymore.

Your question initially is, what do we do if the industry keeps going one way and the city keeps going another way I believe in a clash between the market and the state that I think the state can and should win, and we cannot allow ourselves to try and respond to the way the market goes.

We must try and influence the market itself, because the market is driven only by profit, and it is a sad fact, but you make a lot of money making cars hope that they change.

We have to force them to do so.

The other claim I would make is the "yes, and" approach and that is daylighting.

And that is actually separate from the size of the cars, right?

That we could be having that now we have that on the street that [name of traffic victim] was killed.

What kind of design sense does it make that the only places we have protections are more places that both people have already been killed?

Jonathan Maus: The next exchange got into one of my favorite topics, the role of us automakers and the culture wars.

They've played such a big role in starting here's Danny Harris again with a question for mamdani.

Danny Harris: Also have an industry that didn't want seat belts and didn't want aerobatics, and the list goes on and on.

What do we need to be doing directly with the car?

What more do we need to be doing to be pushing the big three to make better decisions?

Zohran Mamdani: I'm both very optimistic and also not naive.

And so I know that it will be a very long battle to win this legislation.

I think the importance is that we, the immediate, get this legislation within political consciousness.

The fight to tax heavier vehicles is not just a safety fight.

It's also an infrastructure fight these heavier vehicles are ruining roads and highways.

I can't say that I stay up late at night thinking about those roads and highways, but this is an important infrastructure piece for New York to understand that there are many of my colleagues who are often hearing from their constituents about how these roads are degrading more and more and more.

Our legislation would take the money that is raised to this additional sticker price and would push that towards two things.

One is the redevelopment of streets with safety in mind, putting money behind that vision, and the other is the maintenance of the infrastructure.

So I think that there is, I think that there's a ceiling if all of these fights are framed as the war on cars.

I think that there's a lot more possibility in where the fight for safety can go if it is framed through the lens of safety predominantly, and I think that one of the obstacles we face.

What I've seen is the understanding of this through a racial lens.

And I've seen the understanding of street safety and car safety and cyclist safety as a white issue, as a wealthier white issue.

This is how it's framed to me when I bring it up, this is how it's framed by the mayor.

This is framed by many people who will oppose this.

right?

But if we have to get into low-wage, immigrant men who are delivering the food to people are ordering to their apartments.

That's what happened when  Alfredo Cabrera Liconia was killed on Crescent street bike lane and a few months after myself and a few others sent a letter D O T, saying the protected bike lane is not sufficiently protected.

We need jersey barriers.

We didn't get them.

He was killed by a truck turning onto that street.

I had to go to his wake.

I made a video of myself stomping on a flex delineator, and I got a call from the mayor's office being like, 'Please calm down.

[NYC DOT Director] Polly Trottenberg is being considered for a national position.' This is how it all works.

And so I think that one of the possibilities that lies in front of us is making clear who these gaps in our design are actually impacting.

It's the poorest among us who are often out there, and that is what our political leaders must understand, that every time they say no to this, what they're saying is yes to another Alfredo, yes to another [traffic victim], way yes to another.

Tamara, yes to another [traffic victim], one yes to another.

Jaden, these are all my constituents.

I shouldn't have so many names to say.

I've only been there for two and a half years.

So I think that is something that I see.

The framing of this as a racial justice fight is something that gives me inspiration.

I think, you know, the DC model is something that is exciting.

I'm not supportive of congestion pricing, in and of itself, that that is a good so we simply must have it.

We support [congestion pricing] because of what it will create.

It must reduce congestion.

It must be coupled with transit improvements.

And we can't allow electric to become the new solar where we think of them as innately good.

We have to understand them within this larger framework of what we are pushing for.

There's very little we can do about the other side.

We can do a lot about how we frame this, and I think that too often we're we're framing this also in a similar cultural way, where there are many people for whom a car represents something else.

One of the first major battles of my political career was around taxi drivers fighting for debt relief for taxi drivers.

That car was supposed to symbolize their ticket to the middle class and stability in this country.

And I think if we frame it around a car and what a car means and what a car is, versus if we frame it around safety, I think that we have different levels of possibilities there.

There are a number of my constituents who I connect with on different issues, who vehemently disagree with me on this, and they disagree with me on this because they see this as yet another way in which the government is looking to influence their lives and kind of come in and tell them what they should do and what they shouldn't do.

And I think the problem is that there isn't a widespread enough understanding that this status quo is untenable, that this is actually something we have to pull back from.

And in American politics, sacrifice is not a popular idea.

We always try and frame our ideas as everyone's going to win.

Now we're just going to have other winners.

But with things like this, if you like that bigger, larger car, our vision is actually that you will not have that bigger, larger car, so that person will have to pare back their their relationship to that vehicle, in the sense of ownership, but also emotional.

I think that the possibility maybe comes in the more we put these stories as the front of how people understand this.

Because, you know, I mean, there's people who follow me around.

Who are like poking out a camera: 'Why are you working for TransAlt?

Are you paid for by Rider's Alliance?' It's, it's kind of funny, in some sense, and then in another sense, it's like people feel this in their bones, you know.

And and the more we can stop trying to defeat that small, organized group, and the more we can try and have a conversation with the larger public.

And I think maybe that comes from from different messaging, different messengers, but at the same time, that clashes is what I was saying earlier, where I don't want families to have to lose their child once and then lose them every other day when they tell the story.

Is that the price of politics, I mean, we got the closest we ever could have gotten the Safe Streets in Albany.

Part of that was because families came up there pour their pain out to people.

That's how we have to go right now.

But it's just, it's not good.

Jonathan Maus: The next voice you'll hear is Jessica Hart.

She's an advocate with families for Safe Streets.

Zohran Mamdani: Definitely it's part of the culture wars, and I think we have to really reach more regular public people to make any sort of change.

You know, you said that.

It just made me think, like, if our city government just did an

advertising campaign: It's like: 'How long it would take you to find parking if your vehicle is this big?

Versus how long would it take to find parking if your vehicle is this big?

And people would be like, 'Fuck!

I don't have the time!

I just need to get the smaller car.' I think time is money, and especially in New York, and as opposed to being like, you know, a moral choice or political information is just like: 'Do you have time?

Do you not have time?' It's like, 'Yeah, I want that car but I just don't have time so I'm going to get this sedan.'

Danny Harris: I love that idea.

Jonathan Maus: At this point the panel had gotten into audience Q and A and A woman asked Mamdani for advice on how to counter the powerful cultural identity that many people attach to their cars.

I love how his answer reflects his understanding of driving and the perspective of why some people are so attached to their cars.

Zohran Mamdani: I think that one thing I've found is that for many car owners, the car is their place of sanctuary.

That's how they understand the car.

The world is chaos.

The car is sanctuary.

We hear constantly how everything is crumbling around us, but if I get in my car and have my temperature at the right amount and my music playing, and I have my windows up, I'm in control, and everywhere else in the world, I'm not in control.

And I don't think I can get the MTA to play certain music on the bus, but I think that there is that struggle we have to find, you know, and part of this is convenience, and also part of this is kind of re understanding, what is it that actually draws people to cars?

Because I think sometimes we we see it as if they understand our views and they just hate us, but I think sometimes they're just in a completely different conversation about this.

And then we have the bus going up and down.

Sideway goes eight miles an hour because the average bus speed in New York City some of the slowest busses in America.

And we have a mayor who promised 150 miles of bus lanes.

I think we're at eight maybe.

Like, these are all interconnected, because the more busses we get on the street, bus drivers are actually the safest drivers of that safest drivers of any car.

This is all the same fight.

So I think that those are some of the things I think of with what you're saying.

Jonathan Maus: The next audience question was from someone who introduced themselves as Deputy Chief of vehicular crimes for the Manhattan District Attorney's office.

She wanted to know how views about pedestrian safety might be heard differently in suburban and rural cities from how folks think of them in a place like Manhattan.

Deputy DA: How much do you see this as a battle between cities versus other locales?

I think in the city, people are already heavily disincentivized to not have SUVs.

We still have a lot of them, but the they are already feeling.

The taxes are already much higher here, the gas prices are already much higher.

Parking is extremely difficult, but a lot of what exists are SUVs and so it it's a larger societal culture that that impacts how New York City behaves.

I think a major problem is that vehicles are not made to protect people outside of vehicles.

They're only made to protect people inside of vehicles.

And in New York, you can, you can understand, we can hear stories.

I'm a Deputy Chief of Vehicular Crimes at the Manhattan DA's office, and so I see every single fatality that comes through Manhattan, and it's constant, and I work with lots of the families, and I know all of the stories, and I've been doing this for 16 years, so those stories are very personal to me.

I spend a lot of time doing it, and that's why the stories being told over and over again are so powerful.

But you don't have that in other places where people are not seeing themselves as pedestrians.

Here, everybody is a pedestrian at some point.

And how do you do that kind of messaging outside of the city, where manufacturers are really marketing their vehicles to you know, they're not really marketing the SUVs to New York City.

They're marketing them to the rest of the country, where people are not pedestrians, and so people don't care about pedestrians in the same way that we do here.

Zohran Mamdani: And I think that your point it can also be used in New York State, the way in which the city functions versus the rest of the state.

There is a big debate in the assembly chamber this year around the Idaho stop and whether we should pass The Idaho stop.

I have to admit, I already used the Idaho style and I'm doing it in advance the law.

The reason it almost didn't pass the assembly was from opposition within New York City.

And that opposition came around the question of E bikes, mopeds.

You know, deliveristas and this whole narrative and discourse around all of that which I understand, but that is what was driving the opposition.

I say all this to say that the city is far from one, and in fact, the losses of what we're facing in the city can then lead out into losses that impact more rural, suburban areas, even places where people might be even more ready for some of these ideas.

I think that we have now got to get to a point where we've built out a mass transit system, but there are many people outside of Manhattan who do not have the same access to that transit system, and if they do, they think that it's just far better still in their car.

And we have to change that calculus.

And I think that a lot of that is truth, and some of it is also perception, and that's why I think that with the onset of congestion pricing, we have to couple it with service enhancements.

We have to couple it so that people understand sticks and carrots together, that people understand that this is not just an attempt to grab money from them, but rather, this is part of a larger shift away from the car and towards mass transit.

Because I don't think we're at the ceiling of people who could be taking mass transit in New York City, and I don't think we're at the lowest point of people who could be owning a car.

There's a lot more work still to be done, and I think we have to actively get into it, and not just hope that it'll happen from policies and move on.

Jonathan Maus: The next Audience Question led to an exchange about how best to influence change.

Should we rely on social peer pressures and the power of cultural influence?

Or should we rely on government regulation?

Zohran Mamdani: I think it's a great question, because there is an immense need of regulation at every single level.

The thing that gives me hope in being a state lawmaker and not someone who's at the federal level unable to potentially influence the speed at which these kinds regulations are taking place is that if we win a battle and can characterize this successful model, it can be used as the blueprint across the country.

That's one of the few good things about like the you know, the way in which we position ourselves as leaders of the country in spite of our actual actions, is that when we can get somewhere, then it can be exported externally.

That's why, in this conversation, some of the things I think that have come up that might not be understood as much as car regulation, but street design — which I think effectively does push some car regulation — is this question of daylighting, is this question of bus lanes, and is the question of why should we have a limitless number of EV vehicles, if we have a limited number of non EV vehicles?

If the whole idea undergirding all of it is that vehicles, there should be a limit on all of them in general, because it will take every single aspect of government to get us to this place.

And I think the more we can politicize these decisions the better, because too often they're they're understood as kind of bureaucratic mechanisms going through the stages and will slightly get better and slightly get better.

And that even bleeds into the understanding of people who were killed as victims of accidents, as opposed to people who were killed by the design choices that were made by executives and their administration.

So that's what I offer.

But I think it's a great thing to say that we must focus on regulation, because the market is one section and then the state is another.

Jonathan Maus: When someone brought up how terrible drivers had gotten since covid, Mamdani launched into his argument for automated enforcement.

Zohran Mamdani: It is such an ever present danger.

I ride my bike pretty much every day, and I just, I just don't ride on certain streets that are actually more convenient, because I'm terrified of being in by car, and the level of rage in those interactions is also just terrifying.

There's another piece of legislation that I introduced in Albany that would give the city authorization to create automated enforcement of bike lanes, where you would have cameras that would be permitted to take photos of license plates that drive into bike lanes.

This doesn't fully answer your question, but I think that there is a need for automated enforcement.

I have a real criticism of the idea that we should empower the NYPD to any other extent, and that the NYPD should be responsible for traffic enforcement in general once so often, if I'm like, Who's that in the bikeway?

No, it's, it's the PD from our precinct So I think that there is that possibility.

You know, we did pass automated bus line enforcement this year in Albany, which gives the MTA, the authority to issue a ticket for a car that is blocking two consecutive busses in a period of time, because we sadly see so many of those cars idling in that way, delaying our busses.

But I think that there, there has to be a real reckoning with the fact that driver behavior has really gone south since the onset of the pandemic, and even if you think about the crosswalk as a sanctity, right, it's now you just inch, inch, inch, inch, and you're like, a quarter of the way into the crosswalk.

And that's acceptable for me.

I think one of the answers to it is to ensure that we start to create an actual model here of ticketing for these offenses, because when I've seen it with speed cameras.

It does work in the sense of how many of the first offenders do not become second offenders do not become third offenders.

We should have that with bike lanes and bus lanes.

Jonathan Maus: and the final clip I'll share came after moderator Danny Harris gave each panelist an opportunity to share one last thought

Zohran Mamdani: I would say, to politicize every failure of the street and traffic and car design that we have in this city to politicize every death, to make it very clear to politicians and the political ecosystem that these people are not just killed by drivers.

These people are killed by the way in which our streets are designed, by the decisions that are being made, by the policies that are being upheld.

And that it is clear that the responsibility lies with those who lead the city.

And in our case, that's Mayor Adams.

There is an inextricable connection between decisions about bus lanes, decisions about bike lanes, decisions about how we treat pedestrians, and the fight for street safety, and then what happens to the crossing guard?

What happens to the delivery worker?

What happens to the recreational cyclists?

These are all interconnected, and we have to connect those dots so that people understand that these are active decisions, and not just passive products of the way New created.

Jonathan Maus: So there you go.

Pretty amazing to think this guy could be mayor of New York City in just a few weeks time.

I hope you enjoyed this episode.

If you did, please make sure to subscribe and leave a comment and tell your friends about it and make sure you don't miss any future episodes.

Really appreciate all of your support.

If you are not a paid subscriber of bike Portland yet, please become one today at bikeportland.org/support, and find out how you can be a part of what we're doing here, and pay a little bit in to keep it thriving and surviving.

I also want to thank Brock Dittus this of sprocket podcast fame for our wonderful new theme music.

Thanks again for listening.

Until next time, we'll see you in the streets.