Councilman Solomon Proposes National Bike Safety Organization Expunged From Emeryville's Bike Plan

 Nation's Premier Bike Safety Organization No Longer Good Enough for Emeryville, Says Solomon

Nationally Recognized Expert Policy Best Practices Should Be Cut in Favor of Emeryville City Hall Staff Opinions 

City Council member Matthew Solomon recently announced a surprising new proposal that would elevate the Emeryville city staff’s opinions as the highest authority on bike safety for our town, overturning the City’s decades long existing deference to the experts at NACTO, the nation-wide transportation authority and their use of rationally based industry best practices.  The radical policy shift proposal would represent a retrenchment on bike safety according to the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), the organization the City currently uses to set bike and pedestrian safety protocols.  

Matthew Solomon Emeryville City Councilman
Ironically, he ran for Council on a pro-bike platform.

Every neighboring city as well as most of the rest of the nation uses NACTO protocols and guidelines in designing their bike and pedestrian infrastructure. 

Solomon's proposal, if enacted, would turn Emeryville away from NACTO safety guideline expertise in favor of opinions from city staff non-experts and would likely result in compromised bike safety.  It would also place Emeryville in higher litigation jeopardy should a bicyclist get injured in Emeryville it should be noted. 

In a telephone interview with Matthew Solomon, the Councilman specifically said he would not vote for and he would encourage his colleagues to not support NACTO protocols for counting the number of vehicles using Emeryville’s bike boulevards, a practice the City conducted every two years for a decade before 2019.  Further, he said does not agree with NACTO's delineated traffic volume allowable for bike boulevards (maximum number of vehicle trips per day).  NACTO (and the City of Emeryville) recognizes that bike boulevards are streets that vehicles and bikes share and that the number of vehicles using the street must therefore be limited for bike safety.  The way any city knows it is following the NACTO rules is by occasionally counting the vehicle traffic and then working to limit the number of vehicles as per their guidelines, keeping it below the upper safety limit.  

The City of Emeryville used to conduct bi-annual traffic counts as NACTO dictates until business representatives complained in 2019 when the practice was abandoned.  At the time, all five bike boulevards in town had more traffic than NACTO and Emeryville's General Plan allows.  The amount of vehicle traffic in Emeryville has risen substantially since 2019, putting more vehicles on the bike boulevards and bikers in even graver danger, a fact Council member Solomon was unimpressed with in our telephone interview.

After telling the Tattler NACTO’s influence should be removed from Emeryville’s bike plan (known as the Active Transportation Plan (ATP), the Councilman said he would be amenable to amending the ATP at the Council level to achieve that goal.  Currently, the ATP defers to NACTO best practices for bike boulevards and other bike corridors in town as well as pedestrian infrastructure.

Lifted directly from Emeryville's 
Active Transportation Plan (page 39): the law
of the land in bike policy.

Councilman Solomon told the Tattler Emeryville’s city staff knows how to design, plan and build bike boulevards and that they are the ones the City Council should listen to, not a nation-wide member organization committed to bike and pedestrian safety best practices promotion.

The City Council has always had the right to amend the ATP by fiat and if Mr Solomon is successful in convincing a majority on the Council to remove NACTO and the bike boulevard vehicle traffic limits from the ATP, it would be legal but unprecedented.  It would represent the first time in Emeryville history the Council voted to amend the bike plan instead of ignoring it (as they done on our bike boulevards up to now).

Before 2019, the City conducted bi-annual traffic counts on the bike boulevards but then, despite the requirement to do so as spelled out in the General Plan, the counting stopped at former Mayor John Bauters’ insistence.  The City never achieved the bike boulevard traffic volume goals stated by the City’s Bike Plan (and NACTO) it should be noted.  

Several business owners in town, including Wareham Development’s CEO Rich Robbins, have long complained about how bikes hamper tenants getting to and from their buildings.  Businesses have quietly lobbied sympathetic Council members to remove or at least ignore the boulevards, pleas Mr Bauters seem to have listened to as he hamstrung Horton Street bikers by quitting the vehicle counts and ignoring the duty to reduce vehicle traffic.  Mr Robbins publicly supported a plan to remove the Horton Street Bike Boulevard and instead route bikers alongside the railroad tracks behind his buildings.  In the intervening years, the City extended the Emeryville Greenway ped/bike path behind the buildings as Mr Robbins insisted they do but the bike boulevard still remains on Horton Street (albeit with too much vehicle traffic).

Mr Solomon is self described as a pro-bike Council member, having served on the Bike Committee for years.  Supporters claim he is the biggest advocate for bicycling on the Council however Council member Kalimah Priforce, also a bike advocate who uses his bike or public transportation exclusively, doesn’t own a car and he has never even had a driver’s license.  Mr Priforce, for the record, has stated he is in favor of limiting the number of vehicles on the bike boulevards as the ATP (and NACTO) says.  

The Tattler invites Councilman Solomon to explain, in his own words, the dichotomy between his incongruent statements made to the Tattler and his claims of bike advocacy by use of the Tattler’s unedited ‘My Turn’ feature.

2024 (a million years ago):
On the campaign trail, candidate for Council Solomon was
unabashed in his support for bikes and the ATP.  He was
not past going a little puerile and high-handed in his zeal.

Is Planning Commissioner Sam Gould the Seneca Scott of Emeryville?

 Sam Gould / Seneca Scott: Pugilists for Conservative Causes

Both Attack Progressives in Their Respective Communities, 

Both Win Free Speech Law Suits Over Their Respective Tormentors

News Analysis

Emeryville Planning Commissioner, Sam Gould, has won a court decision from litigation initiated by Councilman Kalimah Priforce for ‘targeted harassment, intimidation, and racially charged retaliation’ against the council member.  The judge’s decision, delivered following the civil harassment hearing in Alameda County Superior Court, found that Mr Gould’s assailing actions and speech directed against Mr Priforce that prompted the litigation did not rise to a level that would justify a nullification of the citizen Planning Commissioner’s free speech rights.

Emeryville's Progressive Black Councilman
Kalimah Priforce
The object of scorn from Planning Commissioner
Sam Gould.

Mr Gould, appointed to the Planning Commission by a City Council majority vote in March, has long directed a steady stream of social media invective against Mr Priforce, the lone progressive on the city council for his minority views.  A long time former member of Emeryville’s Bike Committee, Mr Gould’s vituperative attacks on Mr Priforce over the years violated Emeryville’s Code of Ethics for employees and committee members but neither the City Manager nor the City Council acted to enforce the code in support of Council member Priforce.  Since Mr Gould has been elevated to the position of Planning Commission, the public abuse from Mr Gould seems to have stopped Mr Priforce said.  “He [Gould] stopped on the day before he got on the Planning Commission”, Priforce told the Tattler.  Perhaps Mr Gould thought such partisan attacks against a sitting Council member by a sitting Planning Commissioner would appear unseemly enough that the Council majority would be forced invoke the punishments prescribed in Emeryville's Code of Ethics.
   

Commissioner Gould has not revealed why he seems to have stopped the public haranguing of the Council member however by March, the damage had already been done, prompting the Councilman to bypass the feckless and politicized Code of Ethics to make a case against Gould in Alameda County Superior Court.

Emeryville Planning Commissioner Sam Gould (on right)
Not a fan of Black progressives in Emeryville.
He ran for City Council (and lost). 
Pictured also is Council member Sukhdeep Kaur
and establishment Dem Igor Tregub, Chair of the
Alameda County Democratic Central Committee.

The charged public spectacle of the bellicose Sam Gould’s near constant haranguing of the Councilman has drawn comparisons with the infamous and truculent Oakland conservative activist Seneca Scott who for years has engaged in a scorched earth campaign against all progressive comers across Alameda County, especially former Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price.   Mr Scott, has served as a ‘hit man’ for conservative pols who have sought to appear above the fray.  Mr Gould has taken on that same role, essentially offering his services to the conservative majority on the Council who have desired to attack their colleague Priforce but who have thus far not been entirely comfortable appearing unseemly or partisan.

Interestingly,  Mr Scott also just beat an attempt to restrain him by use of the Alameda County court exactly like Mr Gould (they both had the same judge).  Mr Scott, a central organizer behind the recall of former Oakland mayor Sheng Thao drew the ire of Brandon Harami, a former Thao aide who sought the restraining order in April, accusing Mr Scott of harassing him online.  The judge in that case also ruled in favor of ‘free speech’ rights, for private citizens over elected officials.  Mr Scott, the darling of the East Bay corporate elite, has amassed a war chest to defend himself against many legal actions taken against him by many pols and private citizens who have come under his assailing taunts.

Both Sam Gould and Seneca Scott lost elections, Gould for Emeryville City Council and Scott for Oakland City Council and both then turned to attacking former opponents—Scott on a citywide activist stage, Gould locally targeting Mia Esperanza Brown and Calvin Dillahunty, two progressive Black council candidates associated with Mr Priforce.  Both Gould and Scott focus criticism on local (Black) progressive leadership: Scott broadly but mostly laser-focused on Oakland Council member Carol Fifie; Gould specifically on the progressive Council member Kalimah Priforce.  Scott and Gould endorsed and participated in and continue to participate in the astroturf network of establishment, centrist Democrats and right wingers.

Hired Gun Right Wing Oakland Community Activist
Seneca Scott
He ran for City Council and lost.  Now he works 
for deep pocket right wing pols in Oakland.

One of the main points of attack by Mr Gould against Council member Priforce has been his complaints he filed with the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) alleging a failure to disclose funds donated to Priforce by businesses along 40th Street who feel the planned Emeryville 40th Street Multi-model Project will drive away customers.  Mr Priforce says changes he has championed for the 40th Street plan reflect community input and concerns over eminent domain takings by the City.  Mr Gould sees only corruption and he has been using social media to charge Mr Priforce, action the judge sees as an example of a citizen’s free speech right.  

However Mr Gould’s inconsistency, his laser‑focus on one official while ignoring others who benefited from the same project—raises questions about motives and selective concern.  He did not raise equal scrutiny toward Vice Mayor Sukdeep Kaur, who accepted monetary contributions from business leaders who are negatively affected by street closures associated with the project.  Mr Priforce voluntarily recused himself on all 40th Street Council decisions as the law mandates while Ms Kaur continued to vote on the project despite her campaign donations from the business owners.  Ms Kaur’s transgressions are known by Mr Gould Priforce says and the selective outrage by Mr Gould gives away a partisan bias rather than a concern over proper procedural policy making.
  

Mr Priforce is a progressive, the lone progressive on the Emeryville City Council and that’s at the center of the attacks by Planning Commissioner Gould who is a conservative.   The same conservative-calling-out-a-progressive motives apply to Seneca Scott, the East Bay conservative attack dog.

We reached out to both Commissioner Gould and Council member Priforce who supplied quotes for this story that are posted verbatim here:

Commissioner Gould recounted the court hearing: "While it was frustrating to have to go to court to defend myself over unfounded claims, I did not end up having to say more than a sentence or two.  The judge mostly focused the forty-five minute discussion on the fact Mr. Priforce brought this complaint forward with no real evidence supporting it.  While he may make up whatever he wants about me online, in a courtroom you must support your claims with evidence and he was unable to do so.” 

Council member Priforce said: “The judge acknowledged that a civil harassment order wasn’t the appropriate legal remedy - not because the harm didn’t happen, but because pursuing a civil suit would better address my needs - which remains on the table.  In the meantime, I’ve established a legal defense fund to fight back against the escalating attacks and politically motivated FPPC complaints - many of them anonymous, but all of them familiar...which he [Gould] admitted to.  During the hearing, Sam Gould made it plain: he wants my city council seat.  What he fails to understand is that I was elected to serve the people of Emeryville, not to satisfy the ambitions of astroturfing bullies.  This is the people’s seat - not his, not mine - and the people are prepared to defend it.”