the ALLDERBLOB

Just one question matters in the imminent vote for city councillor in Toronto’s Ward 29:

WHO RIDES A BIKE IN THIS TOWN?

Is it Case Ootes [um, sorry, website “under construction”–ed.], who immigrated to Canada from that cyclist’s Nirvana, the Netherlands, at age 13?

Is it Diane Alexopoulos, whose campaign literature tells us she wants more “green space” in the ward?

Or is it Hamish Wilson, among whose chief involvements this past year has been the call for a “bicycle expressway” from East to West along Bloor/Danforth, the Tooker Gomberg Memorial Bikelane?

YOU KNOW WHO IT ISN’T.

It’s not Mr. Odious: he of the gilded Mercedes Benz (vanity plate: “CASE”); the record of threats against hard-won bicycle infrastructure throughout the east end (his call to “scratch out” the bikelanes on Dundas East, with its massive Mercedes Benz dealership alongside, still resonates); his successful push for motorcycle exemption from on-street parking meter payments across Toronto (his son thanks him); his employment history as a highly placed lackey at Imperial Oil (Mr. Odious, did you happen to glance at this month’s Business Executive journal?–but more on that subject later).

It’s not Ms. Alexopoulos: she decries many lacks in her analysis of ward 29: public green space; public library branches; public housing; but never mentions the public denigration of the bicycle under Councillor Ootes’s reign. She touts many an endorsement: from Paula Fletcher (and Paula’s husband’s Labour Council); from Jack Layton and the Toronto Firefighter’s Association (they share mustache secrets). But she is on record with resounding silence on the subject of the incumbent’s spite of the bike. A wink is as good as a nod, Ms. Alexopoulos.

IN FACT, IT’S HAMISH WILSON WHO RIDES A BIKE IN THIS TOWN.

Hamish is more than a cyclist, of course: he’s an organizer and a writer, a single father and an urban missionary of the Jane Jacobs school. As a green party member it has to be acknowledged that he “gets” the connection between one’s consumption choices and the climate we are bequeathing our children.

BUT THE QUESTION MUST STILL BE ASKED: WHO RIDES A BICYCLE IN THIS TOWN?

What you want to know is, who are those people who ride bikes? What are they? What can we say about the bike riders of this town? What are their characteristics? What is it about the potential of cyclists in Ward 29 that should have Mr Ootes and the other non-cyclist candidates defecating in their trousers and running for cover?

First of all, it must be said that in previous ward 29 battles, the lines have never been so clear. Yes, we had the same odious bike-hater running ward 29 in 2003, but back then we had just Mr. Papadakis running against: Papadakis, with his weird cop-love, his secret desire for the police helicopter, and his political posturing as a born-again progressive when his political baggage had always been even more regressive than that of Mr. Ootes. It’s interesting that he garnered even the 56% of the incumbent’s vote that he did, given the then-deputy mayor’s “power” and “prestige,” for many folks must have stayed away, not convinced there was even a real choice.

Today we have a real choice. We have a Real Cyclist to vote for.

BUT WHO OR WHAT IS A CYCLIST?

A statistical analysis of bicycle riders in Canada has recently come to our attention. Entitled CROP Research Profile of Cyclists in Canada, it was published in the October 2006 issue of “Business Executive” journal [shurely you know it, Case? –ed.]. It identified a number of pertinent facts.

1. Cyclists (those who ride “regularly” or “occasionally”) number 37% of Canadians.

2. Canadian Cyclists are more affluent and better educated than the general population.

3. Cyclists are “very involved” in their community. “They seek to help those in need and are sensitive to environmental issues.”

4. Cyclists are “liberal, tolerant, and value freedom over discipline.”

5. Cyclists “do not measure their worth by means of their possessions and are insensitive to others’ opinions. Cyclists are moreover suspicious of advertising and of the models it sets.”

THAT PITTER PATTER OF LITTLE FEET WOULD BE THE SOUND OF ODIOUS AND ALEXOPOULOS RUNNING TO THEIR RESPECTIVE CAMPAIGN MANAGERS

What they will want to know is twofold.

1. Are there sufficient cyclists in Ward 29 to give the seat to an upstart on a bike?

2. Can cyclists–proud, independent thinkers to a one–be convinced to vote en bloc for a candidate who self-identifies first and foremost as one of them?

In other words, is there a Union of Bicycle Users (UBU) in Toronto who can take the Odious throne? Is UBU the king-maker in Ward 29?

We don’t know the answer to this question. We do know that in 2003, Sr. Odious defeated M. Papadakis by a vote of 9,352 to 5,207 (a third party received 480 votes). We also know that in Toronto at large, just about 40% of eligible voters cast ballots. If this ratio held true for Ward 29, there would be some 37,500 eligible voters in the ward. Let us suggest that, in accord with the CROP data printed above, 37% of those self-identify as cyclists. If that group could be reached on election day, that would represent 13,900 voters.

Which is to say: if UBU can only struggle from its sleep, there could be a real upset in Ward 29 this fall.

Case Ootes, you can sit down. Diane Alexopoulos, relax. The Cyclists want this prize.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 11th, 2006 at 6:33 pm and is filed under unlikely versions of reality. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.