Cambridge Day does not endorse candidates or positions. Views expressed in this column are those of the writer.
An election mailer from the Cambridge Bike Safety Independent Expenditure Political Action Committee shouts “YOUR VOTE CAN SAVE LIVES” in bold type and states that “Our safety is at risk. In 2024, three cyclists were killed in Cambridge . . .”
This is propaganda. It omits the important fact that two of the fatalities occurred in locations with new separated lanes, the intersections at Hampshire and Portland and Mt. Auburn and DeWolfe Streets. Reports on the State Police reconstruction of these collisions and the Middlesex County District Attorney’s incident reports are long overdue, but until they are released the possibility that the separated bike lanes were a contributing factor cannot be ruled out.
Every resident wants streets that are safe and where young cyclists and visitors are not killed.ย By telling us to vote for its approved candidates for City Council, Cambridge Bike Safety would have us ignore other important issues and candidates who see that separated bike lanes are not a safety panacea, may introduce new hazards, and have real costs.
John Pitkin, Fayette Street, Cambridge
Board member of Cambridge Streets for All and a member of the Broadway Parking Coalition.
This post was updated to reflect the writer’s involvement with two groups engaged in efforts to stop bike lane expansion in Cambridge.ย




โ Every resident wants streets that are safe and where young cyclists and visitors are not killed.โ this is incorrect. The letterโs author John Pitkin himself sued the city of Cambridge to remove safe bike lanes (see https://www.cambridgeday.com/2022/06/10/group-files-lawsuit-over-cycling-safety-ordinance-telling-city-to-rescind-restore-and-prevent-lanes/) after a cyclist was killed at Inman square. It is not a โspecial interestโ to not want to be killed while getting around Cambridge quickly, for free, and without harming the climate.
Sigh, I don’t think Kim, Minh-Thi, and John’s families would be very happy to hear the death of their loved ones called a propaganda piece.
Like I said in my article (https://www.cambridgeday.com/2025/10/14/bike-safety-my-voting-priority/), the problem is not the lane but the intersection. The Transportation Department installed flex posts at these crash locations, after it was too late. Why aren’t they installing flex posts at all dangerous intersection, to prevent more people from being killed? A bare majority of the city council won’t let them.
Totally agree!! These bikers are getting “handouts” from our city tax dollars. They think in these bike lanes they don’t need to learn to bike safely. Remind you of anything… just like the people who get Snap, why do they have to get a job if they get food for free? Thank you John Pitkin for calling out this so-called “life or death” propaganda from our society’s moochers
The intersections where Minh-Thi Nguyen and Kim Staley were killed were unprotected. The CSO quick build bike lanes donโt target intersection improvements, but they undoubtedly have improved safety along those corridors. Side swipes and doorings can be deadly, just as the right hooks in the two cases mentioned were. The solution is more separated lanes AND protected intersections, not to abandon safety.
Totally don’t agree. Bikers are not getting handouts from the city any more than drivers are. We all pay for the streets, whether we drive or not.
Drivers break the rules as often or more often than cyclists. Studies have confirmed this as has my personal experience walking around Cambridge. But drivers cause *virtually all* pedestrian deaths and serious injury.
We already know that the Cambridge bike lanes have drastically reduced accidents. To claim they haven’t is just plain false.
The roll of bike lanes in accidents “hasn’t been ruled out”? In fact, Minh-Thi Nguyen was killed by a truck driver in a “right hook accident. Blaming the bike lane is the real propaganda.