No, Tribune Editorial Page Editor Chris Jones, I didn’t call just “anyone” who opposes Complete Streets a member of the “right-leaning political class”

If you’re a walk/bike/transit advocate, when you open up a Chicago Tribune editorial about a sustainable transportation topic, it’s best to wear a hazmat suit. The paper’s traditionally conservative editorial board is almost always (with rare exceptions) on the wrong side of the issue. In fact ,when the news outlet ran a Debbie Downer-style assessment of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority bill that saved local transportation from the brink, Rep. Kam Buckner, a sponsor of the legislation, coined a clever phrase this approach: “Trib-splaining”.

While Tribune editorials are basically written anonymously and attributed to the editorial board, my past experiences with Editorial Page Editor Chris Jones leads me to believe he’s largely to blame for this tendency. Perhaps I’m a little salty because he recently referred to me as “a serial harasser of journalists.” Got it, so when the editorial board criticizes somebody, it’s commentary. When they get criticized or questioned, it’s harassment.

When I saw this morning’s Trib editorial “A sensible compromise on Archer Avenue takes more than bike activists into account,” the somewhat snarky headline made me brace myself for another bad take on a transportation subject. And, yeah Jones’ writing (I’m 99.99 percent sure he wrote this) about the current changes being made to the Archer traffic safety plan is, in fact pretty terrible, in a stereotypically Trib-like manner.

However, I did have a glimmer of hope because Jones called the changes “a sensible compromise,” nearly identical language as my phrase, “a reasonable compromise” from the Streetsblog analysis of the changes, published a week earlier. There’s also proof he read my piece, although he obviously didn’t do so very carefully.

Here’s a quick rundown of a few of the obviously factually incorrect and/or cliche “bikelash” statements in the editorial.

• “Archer Avenue, a diagonal throughway on the Southwest Side, a longstanding alternate to the oft-clogged Stevenson Expressway and a street heavily used by trucks, always was a bizarre candidate for reduced vehicular capacity.” It’s “bizarre” to do a Complete Streets project make the corridor safer and more pleasant for all road users, and create a single direct option between the Southwest Side and downtown for bike and e-scooter users, when drivers already have two?

• “Chicago does not have the climate nor the compact footprint of, say, Amsterdam.” This is bikelash 101. We also don’t have the climate of the Artic city of Olu, Finland, and tons of people ride bicycles there.

• “There has been so much reduction in capacity on our streets (Elston Avenue, long a substitute for the Kennedy Expressway being another diagonal example)…” Why does the Trib keep dredging up a street reconfiguration that dates back to at least 1998, when Ald. Anthony Quezada (35th) was three years old? 

•  “Removing costly ‘improvements’ mid-project, as has happened on Archer, hardly is ideal.” For the umpteenth time, CDOT is not permanently removing any concrete bike lane protection or pedestrian islands to make room for 17 new car spots, it’s adjusting their locations to make room for the additional parking!

I could go on, but even more troubling to me is that the article also includes a veiled-but-blatant attack on Streetsblog Chicago. Fortunately, it’s one that’s very easy to disprove. Just like Jones doesn’t have to mention his own name in what it’s safe to assume is a one-man op-ed, he doesn’t mention this publication by name, but he directly quotes my Archer article from Friday.

“In recent months, [bike advocates] have turned more to demonizing anyone who dares to oppose their views as members of the ‘right-leaning political class’ or in the debate for personal gain,” Jones wrote, directly quoting me.

Early in Friday’s article, I mentioned, “the weekly [protests] on Archer Avenue – anti-Complete Streets protesters backed by right-leaning politicians and lobbyists.” Then I wrote this:

“It’s been troubling to see Trump-friendly politicos such as Ald. Ray Lopez (15th) and Urban Center CEO Juan Rangel, and their allies like [pro-ShotSpotter] City Council hopeful Claudia Zuno, making a wedge issue out of potentially lifesaving infrastructure. They hope to defeat progressive Ald. Julia Ramirez (12th), who signed off on the Archer project, in next year’s City Council election. (Streetsblog Chicago does not endorse candidates.)”

Later, I said, “While it’s wrong for the right-leaning political class to try to exploit Brighton Park residents’ and merchants’ discontent with the Archer initiative in an effort to win votes, that doesn’t mean their frustration is completely unwarranted.” Obviously, I wasn’t saying, as Jones claimed, that “anyone who dares to oppose [Complete Streets is a member] of the ‘right-leaning political class.'” I clearly was not arguing that all those residents and business owners belong to such a group. Rather, I was saying that the aforementioned (very or somewhat) conservative politicians and lobbyists do!

Chris Jones, if you’re reading this (and I’m confident you will read it), please be an actual journalist and retract what’s, in effect, libel against me and Streetsblog Chicago. Thanks in advance!

On November 12, SBC launched our 2026 fund drive to raise $50K through ad sales and donations. That will complete this year’s budget, at a time when it’s tough to find grant money. Big thanks to all the readers who have chipped in so far to help keep this site rolling to the end of 2026! Currently, we’re at $32,626 with $17,374 to go, ideally by the end of May.

If you value our livable streets reporting and advocacy, please consider making a tax-deductible gift here. If you can afford a contribution of $100 or more, think of that as a subscription. That will help keep the site paywall-free for people on tighter budgets, as well as decision-makers. Thanks for your support!

– John Greenfield, editor