Cyclists’ Letter to Councillor Mary-Margaret McMahon (Toronto, Ward 32)

Myself and other cyclists in my ward (Beaches-East York) are disappointed that our councillor, Mary-Margaret McMahon, voted for Rob Ford’s awful “bike plan”. But we’re not about to sit here and whinge about it: No way! We’re organizing an awesome group to advocate for cycling. McMahon’s not one of the legion of Toronto anti-cycling troglodyte politicians. I think her heart’s in the right place but she didn’t weigh the pros and cons of this plan very well. So we want to make sure she knows what our interests are in the future.

I figured the best way to get started is to write her and see where she’s at: what’s the rationale behind her vote and why was the cycling group that already exists in this ward sleeping during this debate? I bet I’m right in that she’s a good person who made a mistake because she was misinformed. And, if I’m wrong in thinking she actually has our interests in mind, this little seed might sprout into something very sharp and thorny.

So to get the ball rolling I’ve written a letter and invited others to check it out and suggest edits. If you have suggestions to improve this letter, please comment. And if it’s something you’d like to add your name to before I send it on it’s way to Councillor McMahon — please say so!

The letter:

Dear Councillor McMahon,

We’re writing on behalf of a group of Ward 32 constituents wishing to organize to better promote cycling in our community.

Your excellent speech to council expressing your concern about pollution directly affects your family inspired us, as did your concern for Shawnte Clow – the resident of your ward who was struck by a car while cycling to city hall to add her voice to the others asking you to reject the Mayor’s Bike Plan. The fact that you’re a cyclist yourself and passionate about making Toronto a bicycle-friendly city; yet voted for a plan which will have the opposite effect, suggests that the cycling community in Ward 32 didn’t effectively communicate our interests to you.

We wish to ensure this failure of communication doesn’t happen again.

We believe the Mayor’s Bike Plan is fundamentally flawed in a manner ensuring it will not make Toronto a safer and more welcoming city for cyclists:

First: the removal of already-existing infrastructure designed to protect cyclists and encourage cycling is not in our interests. This aspect of the Plan is, beyond debate, a step backward for cycling in Toronto.

Second: the removal of infrastructure without consulting with that ward’s elected representative is a thoughtless and irresponsible decision which points to a lack of respect for neighbourhood residents and their concerns. We speak specifically of the removal of the Jarvis St. bike lanes and the restoration of the 5th lane. This is not only a waste of money, but it flies in the face of the ongoing revitalization of Jarvis St. It endangers the vibrant mixed-use neighbourhood that Jarvis is slowly becoming, turning it into a downtown highway for North Toronto and suburban drivers against the wishes of its residents and Councillor Wong-Tam. Many Ward 32 residents use the Jarvis St. bike route, and its destruction is not in our interest.

Third: the proposed separated lanes are, as Councillor Vaughan very effectively pointed out before the vote, proposed for roads which are currently incapable of integrating separated lanes. Because the proposed lanes are contingent on study and consultation, as opposed to a fixed timeline with concrete plans for the end product, we believe it very likely they will never be fully implemented. A thoughtful and progressive plan for cycling infrastructure would include guaranteed improvements. The only guarantees in the Mayor’s Plan are losses.

Finally: even if the intended separated lanes were delivered in a form that would genuinely improve cycling in Toronto, the long-term ramifications of this plan far outweigh its benefits. The Major’s Bike Plan involves shifting development from city streets to off-road trails. None of us object to improving off-road trails for cyclists. But such investments don’t promote cycling as a valid form of urban transportation, they promote cycling as a recreational activity. There is nothing wrong with cycling for pleasure and exercise, but it’s cycling as an everyday means of transport – every day, in all weather, and in every season of the year, that has the potential to change our city for the better. This is the kind of cycling that invites mass participation, that reduces congestion and pollution, that promotes economic development and the beautification of the neighborhoods we live in. This is the kind of cycling the city should be investing in.

The shifting of investment away from city streets to off-road trails does not promote cycling as a valid and safe form of urban transportation. To the contrary, it’s a massive investment to redefine cycling as a hobby that will impact the direction of cycling development for a very long time. This is not in the interests of Ward 32′s cycling community.

The promotion of communication between yourself and those affected by your decisions is a necessary component of advocacy. The fact that you seem to care very deeply about making Toronto a more bike-friendly city and yet voted for a plan that will have the opposite effect suggests that such advocacy didn’t happen in Ward 32. So we wish to ensure, by establishing an effective and open means of communication between yourself, Ward 32′s cycling community, and the constituency at large, that cycling issues are given the prominence they deserve in a ward to which cycling is so important to our daily lives.

We understand that a cycling group called “32 Spokes”, with which you’re directly affiliated, already exists in Ward 32. We’re happy to find that this group exists in our ward, but disappointed by the fact that it has so little presence in the community. As passionate cyclists and politically-engaged constituents we find it very surprising that we’ve never heard of it. This group seems to have no online presence and no visible outreach to the cycling community.

And, as shown by the fact that this group didn’t effectively influence your vote on this very important issue, we have concerns about 32 Spokes’ effectiveness as an advocate for cyclists’ interests. As you’ve offered yourself as the contact for 32 Spokes we consider it appropriate to direct these concerns to you, as well as our concerns regarding your vote on the Mayor’s Bike Plan, in hope that you can advise us on how to best move forward.

Our sincere best wishes,

Me! and Us! and… maybe You?!

Our Councillor: Mary-Margaret MacMahon

If you live in Ward 32 please get involved by offering criticism, grammatical corrections, support, and hopefully your name to add at the bottom of this letter. Use the comment buttons.

Or, if you want to get in touch privately, feel free to email me:

Or say hello on Twitter.