Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council Should Be More Than an Info Session

Rebekah Scheinfeld and Gabe Klein during Q&A
New CDOT Commissioner Rebekah Scheinfeld needs to lead the Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council in a more engaging and meaningful direction. Photo: Ryan Griffin-Stegink

I recently moved to the Windy City from Portland, Oregon, where I had served as a member of the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee at the state level for bike and pedestrian issues. So I came into last Wednesday’s meeting of the Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council excited to hear the breadth and depth of pedestrian advocacy and projects happening in Chicago. Based on my experience in Oregon, I expected a meeting structured around deliberate conversation and debate. Instead, what I saw was an information session.

In Oregon, I was appointed by the governor to my four-year term in the fall of 2009, and my tenure on OBPAC was marked by a significant shift in the way viewpoints of advocates and members of the committee were incorporated into broader policy change. What had at one time been more of a one-way arrangement, in which Oregon DOT staff came to present information in a “show and tell” format, became a real committee where the governor’s top sustainability and transportation advisors frequently dropped by to pick up ideas. Tabletop nameplates served to create a sense of professionalism and respect. The committee’s later decision to increase the number of meetings from four to six per year increased the stakes for committee member participation and staff preparation.

Sitting back and observing the room on Wednesday, it wasn’t clear to me who was on the committee and who wasn’t. With several presenters and members of the public nestled among the committee, the resulting dynamic was one of indecisiveness. What actions were going to come out of the meeting? Which players in the room were going carry out the action? What were the results of these conversations?

What should be an opportunity to press for changes to the status quo instead felt more like a rote list of ongoing projects and initiatives. We were told about Safe Routes to School projects and grants, the Safe Routes Ambassadors program, snow removal efforts, and pedestrian fatalities, but we did not exchange ideas.

While there is certainly value to informing advocates of current efforts, in Oregon the advisory committee also involved truly advising public agencies. At MPAC, there should be an opportunity for larger ideas and discussions. General questions should be posed of committee members, such as the best way to go about a policy change, which partners to include in reform efforts, or general concerns for pedestrians in the built environment. At the very least, a public comment period, which was conspicuously absent from the agenda, would be a good start.

While Oregon may be perceived as an anomaly in the amount of public process at each level of government, it has taken the concerted efforts of government staff and citizens to make it this way. If you believe in public process, creating a dialogue in which all topics are welcomed and encouraged is but a small step in fulfilling the potential of advisory committees. The result of this approach is more robust, vetted, and longer-lasting solutions.

As an example of what’s lacking now at MPAC, surprisingly little was said about pedestrian fatalities, which the committee covered for less than five minutes. Considering that drivers killed two pedestrians in January, it seems that the meeting could have been an opportunity for committee members to address the causes of these deaths and how they can be prevented. But apart from some cursory mentions, there was little discussion of the pedestrian deaths last month.

Almost as sure as the next snowstorm, people will be inconvenienced, injured, or worse, killed while walking in the Windy City. In a room filled with pedestrian advocates, perhaps time would be better spent discussing what more can be done to improve pedestrian safety rather than holding a session dedicated mainly to updating everyone on existing pedestrian programs and improvements.

If MPAC is indeed going to serve as an “advisory” body, it would be great to see more questions being asked of its members about how they will fix the deadly status quo. Given CDOT Commissioner Rebekah Scheinfeld’s background in transportation issues at the Chicago Transit Authority and her desire to move MPAC in the same direction as her predecessor, Gabe Klein, there is hope she will create a stronger sense of urgency. We need bold leadership and strong citizen advisory committees to reach the city’s goal of eliminating traffic fatalities by 2022.

  • kastigar

    The Mayor’s Bicycle Advisory Council isn’t much different. Although the prepared agenda is supposed to allow time for public comments and input the reports issued usually take up all the time so there isn’t any time for public comments and input.

    I’m not sure who this advisory council is advising and for what purpose other than just to hand out material for the press.

  • peterskosey

    As co-chair of the MPAC I completely agree and I accept your challenge to create a more meaningful and engaging advisory committee. I would welcome thoughts or ideas to this effect from you and all Streetsblog readers. Thank you.

  • Coolebra

    Here’s the webpage dedicated to the MPAC, I guess (maybe there’s a different one somewhere):

    http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/ped/svcs/mayor_s_pedestrianadvisorycouncil.html

    No real background. No mission. No agendas. No minutes. No plan (though there is one, http://chicagopedestrianplan.org/). No facts. No stats. No urgency. No resources. Out.of.date.

    Any metrics to chart progress in addressing key issues identified in the 2011 Ped Plan? Are the milestones being achieved? Where can one easily check-up on implementation status? What are emerging issues and concerns perhaps not captured in the 2011 plan, if any?

    A meaningful and engaging advisory committee is accountable for advancing desired outcomes and being transparent in its efforts and actions, whether successful or not. When implementation isn’t going as planned, let people know why and what strategies are being deployed to overcome related challenges.

    Clearly linking current data and action to the plan’s goals and objectives while at the same time making it easy for stakeholders and other interested parties to participate in the process and evaluate implementation progress is central to becoming a valuable, engaging, and meaningful advisory body.

  • Daniel Ronan

    I would offer the following suggestions:
    1. As stated in the article, a public comment period and tabletop nameplates for all members.
    2. Printed agendas, or a static agenda that is always visible during the meeting.
    3. A different room or room arrangement which encourages dialogue. With the majority of the committee’s backs to the audience in Room 1103 at City Hall, a room which isn’t uni-directional would make a big difference in terms of encouraging discussion.
    4. As the previous comment stated, a website, (link the two together or choose one between the Complete Streets WordPress blog (http://chicagocompletestreets.org/your-streets/mayors-advisory-councils/) and the existing City of Chicago website page (http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/ped/svcs/mayor_s_pedestrianadvisorycouncil.html)) which includes a) minutes, b) agendas, c) mission and vision. For an example, you can look at OBPAC’s website (http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/Pages/obpac.aspx).
    5. List of members with photos (or group photo), member affiliations and biographies, member term start and end dates and information on applying to become a member of MPAC.
    6. Press releases for each MPAC meeting, actively advertising and seeking community input on pedestrian issues.
    7. A rotating chair position would help develop leadership on the committee and allow space for the generation of unique leadership, ideas, and initiatives. OBPAC elects Chair and Vice Chair positions every year.
    8. Give MPAC grant making authority. OBPAC, with a biennial budget of about $6 million, funds bike and pedestrian projects across Oregon. It sets grant standards and goals. ODOT staff assists the committee with technical engineering questions. Perhaps CDOT could have a pilot project to empower MPAC to disperse project grants and compare MPAC project outcomes with the outcomes of traditionally distributed CDOT project grants.
    9. Right to review and approve or reject all CDOT pedestrian safety literature or literature involving pedestrians.
    10. Entrusting members to pursue projects representing the committee. As an example, I asked for and was approved to write this letter (http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/epa_school_siting_guidelines.pdf) on EPA School Siting guidelines representing OBPAC.

    Please let me know if you need any help! I am more than willing to offer my experience and effort to create a stronger MPAC.

  • I think having meeting information online, both past and future, is paramount to having any level of public, unaffiliated participation.

    There must also be a mechanism to be alerted via email, like MBAC, of upcoming meetings. For a long time in 2012 I didn’t know when the meetings occurred and it took multiple tries for me to receive any kind of alert that a meeting was coming up.

    Presently, the next meeting date is not available on the website.

  • Pingback: City Focuses on Communication, Not Citations, to Remove Snow | Streetsblog Chicago()

  • Pingback: “Walk To Transit” Targets 20 CTA Stations For Quick Safety Fixes | Streetsblog Chicago()

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

The Latest Word From the Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council

|
The Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council met last Wednesday, the day after an SUV driver struck and killed an 83-year-old man in Rogers Park, then fled the scene. At the meeting, Chicago Department of Transportation Commissioner Gabe Klein, co-chair of MPAC, along with Peter Skosey, vice president of the Metropolitan Planning Council, described the crash as “gruesome.” […]

Pedestrian Fatality Tracker: More Deaths This Year Than Last

|
More people were killed while walking in Chicago in the first seven months of this year, compared to the same time period last year. Chicago transportation commissioner Rebekah Scheinfeld pointed out to the Mayor’s Pedestrian Advisory Council last week that “this is the first increase since 2009.” 21 people on foot died in car crashes […]

CDOT Commisioner Scheinfeld Discusses Her Background, Zero in Ten

|
Here’s the second installment of my interview with Chicago Deparment of Transportation Commissioner Rebekah Scheinfeld, in which we talked about her background, commuting habits, and the city’s Zero in Ten campaign to eliminate traffic fatalities. John Greenfield: When I interviewed Gabe Klein, I got some really interesting material about his perspective on transportation by asking […]

CDOT: Citizen Support is Necessary For Us to Redesign City Streets

|
About 45 “civilians” – people who weren’t obligated to attend – showed up for yesterday’s Mayor’s Bicycle Advisory Council meeting yesterday, making it one of the most democratic MBAC meetings ever. The council, which meets quarterly at City Hall during the workday, usually draws only about 10-15 attendees who aren’t there in an official capacity, many of whom are […]