At Transportation Alternatives, holding down the fort until a new leader is found

In June, when Gov. Kathy Hochul announced an "indefinite pause" on congestion pricing for vehicles entering midtown Manhattan just when the long-fought-for plan was read for primetime, she encountered swift backlash from stakeholders citywide who said the plan was needed not only to de-clog streets but to raise desperately needed money for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Not least among her critics was Transportation Alternatives, a nonprofit that for 50 years now has been lobbying for, well, alternatives to New York City’s car culture - be that in the form of more money and resources for mass transit or more protected bike lanes or turning more of the city's streets into usable space for pedestrians and loungers. 

In April, after Danny Harris stepped down as TA's head after five years, the org announced that its co-EDs, during an ongoing search for a new leader, would be Elizabeth Adams, formerly the group's deputy executive director for public affairs, and Megan Eiss, formerly the group's senior director of people and operation. 

Adams and Eiss talked to New York Nonprofit Media about what it's like co-helming an organization, what they want to happen with congestion pricing and how to deal with TA haters both online and at real-life events.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Thanks to both of you for talking today. First of all, what is up with the search for the new ED?

Eiss: It's still open. We'll have the first round of interviews toward the end of September.

Are either or both of you applying?

Eiss: I am not.

Adams: I'm gonna pass on that question.

Okay, fair enough. So here's where I always begin: If we met at a dinner party and you told me you were the co-leaders of TA and I'd never heard of it, how would you describe it?

Adams: Our mission is fighting for better walking, biking and public transit, and at the core of that is the value that we deserve a city that works for all of us. We believe that our streets are for people and that no matter who you are, public space belongs to you. This means reliable public transit, parks and greenspace and security, and being able to cross streets or bike on them safely and without worry. We're called Transportation Alternatives because people deserve more options, not less. Having to depend on a car in a city as walkable and dense as New York doesn't make sense.

What is the division of labor between the two of you?

Eiss: We decided early on that my experience is really in the back of the house—everything from development to HR to operations. And Elizabeth is front-of-house, interacting with the public and managing advocacy.

Adams: We'd both been working in the organization for a period of time before the ED resigned, so we really leaned into how our skill sets and work styles complement each other. That's what makes this successful. We let each other lead. We're seeing that particularly right now with the fight over congestion pricing, which is a big moment. We really looked at what the organization needs right now.

How do the two of you communicate on a daily basis?

Eiss: We have a standard weekly meeting as well as half-hour meetings sprinkled in throughout the week as needed. And we're in constant communication on Slack.

So speaking of congestion pricing, let's talk about that first. Did you get any whispers of Hochul's reversal before it happened?

Adams: No—it was shocking. Just a few weeks prior to the reversal, the governor was standing side by side with organizational leaders and elected officials claiming how important and critical and beneficial it would be for New York City. And then all of a sudden she woke up one day and completely about-faced. There were MTA advertisements for it already up and the infrastructure was ready to go—everything was set to move. Then she flouted basic legal procedures, because it was a law that had been passed five years prior that she had signed. You don't just get to not implement a law because you change your mind about it. And that's why there are now two lawsuits on the premise that what she did was illegal and harmful to New Yorkers. 

The governor upended years of work at her own agencies and, frankly, disrespected millions of New Yorkers who depend on public transit to get around. And that's why you saw such a quick and strong response in opposition, saying "How dare you? This is a slap in the face to New Yorkers." That's where I think we here at TA really stepped into our bread and butter and saw very clearly the impact of TA in this fight. We have a large grassroots presence across the city, we have borough committees and local activist communities. And so because of that we were able to connect very quickly to New Yorkers who were rightly frustrated and fed up and demanding something better than this. We had the largest rally New York City has ever seen for congestion pricing organized in just a few days [after Hochul's reversal]. Our activists made thousands of calls and sent emails to elected officials, making sure that Hochul isn't allowed to get away with this. We heard from one elected who said that in the span of 48 hours, they'd never gotten so many calls on an issue before. So that is the role of TA, listening to our on-the-ground community leaders and stepping in to fight.

Hochul has not admitted this, but it's widely believed she did this because she was worried about Democrats losing more seats in the upcoming November elections in crucial suburban districts where people often come in and out of the city by car or truck. To play devil's advocate for a moment, is there not some logic in her decision, to the extent that one cares about Democrats holding onto or gaining seats?

Adams: Look, when millions of New Yorkers depend on public transit and are counting on the financial stability to have a working transit system, and the governor upends that because of a few political conversations that she has—that is not a democratic process. And if she were concerned about the impact of congestion pricing on elections, she's clearly made it an election issue now. One of the first campaign ads we saw was by [Republican congressional candidate] Mike Lawler [taking credit for organizing people against congestion pricing]. I certainly don't think she has done Democrats any favors, if that was her idea.

So what do you want to happen now?

Adams: She should turn the program on now—it's ready to go. Every day that we don't start it, we continue to face higher rates of air pollution and asthma, to face the worst congestion, and to face risking our public transit system that is losing billions of dollars with this reversal. She could change that any day. The state just needs to sign a document moving ahead and it's really important that she does that immediately, especially because we're facing a potential change in D.C. where we might have a federal administration opposed to giving New York federal matching funds for public transmit. 

But it's all but certain that Hochul will not unpause the plan until after the elections—in fact, she has basically said as much—so what do you want to happen then?

Adams: It's important that the program is maintained as it is. Each week [since the reversal] the governor has come up with some potential idea of how she says she's going to fund the MTA. But none of those have been realistic proposals. None provide the dedicated funding needed for public transit. 

Okay, so what else is front-burner for TA right now?

Adams: Another big citywide campaign of ours is implementing the NYC Streets Plan, which would require taking a holistic look at our streetscape around our bus system, bike network, pedestrian space. We should have a broader vision for movement on our streets. It would be comprehensive and serve as a master plan. It came about because we need to move beyond a trench warfare piecemeal approach to designing our streets. The plan would require 250 miles of protected bus lanes by 2026 and also 350 miles of protected bike lanes. The plan was passed in the City Council in 2019 and our role is working to make sure that it's implemented. For example, now it's common that you're biking on a protected bike lane for a block, and then it's gone and you have to navigate a super unsafe street for 10 blocks. That's not a real transit network. 

How is it going in terms of trying to make it a reality?

Adams: This year, so far, unfortunately only five miles out of 50 required miles for bike lanes have been installed. It's not moving at the pace we need. That's why TA's work is so important, because it requires accountability for projects like this to move forward. 

One thing I was curious to ask you is that I've noticed that, in the absence of protected bike lanes, it's become very common for bikers and e-bikers and moped drivers and food delivery guys to ride on the sidewalk, which can be very unnerving and dangerous for pedestrians. But in fact the sidewalks are often quite wide and part of them could be made into a protected bike lane. Has anyone discussed that?

Adams: Our approach is that when we have space for each road user, everyone benefits. In every instance when a protected bike lane [on the street, not the sidewalk] has been put in, the rate of people biking on the sidewalk has dropped dramatically—over 90 percent. We can share some data on one very clear case of that on Eighth Avenue in Brooklyn near Prospect Park. As soon as they put in a protected bike lane, reports of bikers on sidewalks declined. 

But to your knowledge, has using some of the sidewalk for protected bike lanes been discussed?

Adams: There's a lot of creative approaches that New York City could be taking. We actually advocate for wider sidewalks. But yeah, there are some models where you put a bike lane on the sidewalk, which gives bikes more protection from cars. So it's about looking at the streets that you have and following best practices for all road users. 

Okay, what else is front-burner for TA?

Adams: Our big campaign is 25x25, which is, if we repurposed 25 percent of the space in the city dedicated to the movement and storage of vehicles, every New Yorker would live near a protected bus lane, bike lane or public greenspace. That would be huge for people's quality of life. 

How did both of you get to TA? What was your career path?

Eiss: I graduated from George Washington University with a degree in political science and thought I'd be an educator, so I joined Teach For America and taught in the South Bronx for two years—and frankly, after six months, I found it to be the hardest, most challenging job I've ever had. So I went to law school and studied public interest law and landed at a small firm doing in New York City adoption law, which allowed me to travel to all five boroughs. I quickly realized I didn't love the litigation piece of lawyering. A former professor of mine was starting a nonprofit helping immigrant kids facing deportation get free lawyers. So I cofounded that with her. Being able to grow that organization was thrilling. Once I'd grown its funding to $1.2 million, I decided to consult with other nonprofits for a few years. Then I landed at TA about a year ago and have been helping them develop systems and processes.

Adams: I grew up in New York City. My background for many years is in advocacy and policy. Prior to TA, I worked in reproductive rights advocacy for many years, then with the City Council on social service issues. I came to TA because, for me, it's a continuation of the work I've been doing thinking about how we provide care for our communities. I believe very deeply that when we make our transit system and public space work for everyone, we create thriving communities and really support people's autonomy. 

What's something since you've been at TA that it has done, or something about it, that you're most proud of?

Eiss: This is a joint answer for us, which is that we've worked really hard to make sure that the internal culture of TA is transparent and open and that we are responding to staff requests and needs. We both negotiated a new union contract since we've both been interim EDs. That's a big win. But overall I'd say the cultural shift that we've been trying to put in place that's leading into even bigger wins. The more transparent we can be about how decisions are being made from the top down, the more easily we can communicate that to board members and other stakeholders.

And how have you done that?

Eiss: I think we've put more time and resources into thinking about how information gets communicated to everyone because, especially internally, they can often be overlooked. Before we decide on something, we ask ourselves, "How will this affect various people within our organization?" It's also about being careful about the order in which you communicate, making sure you're getting buy-in from the main players on a decision before rolling it out. 

Adams: One thing I feel proud of is that we really think through how to bring a more equitable lens to issues of transportation and public space access, in connecting our work to issues of climate, of social justice, and and really looking to communities who've been underrepresented or underserved in some of our advocacy work.

Can you give an example?

Adams: Recently we released a report with NASA looking at the temperature of all the bus stops in New York City. We looked at every bus stop in New York City and found, not surprisingly, that there were huge disparities in the heat of different stops, with the hottest being in the Bronx, in neighborhoods that haven't received the infrastructure they deserve, like tree coverage to create shade and public seating, which is more common in wealthier, whiter neighborhoods. 

I'm also proud that we've continued to advance proactive policy wins in New York City, even during chaotic times. Just a few months ago, we helped pass Sammy's Law, which gives New York City control over its speed limit, bringing it from 25 to 20 miles per hour. It was a hard fight but the core of it was saying that we should be thinking about our streets through a lens of safety and community well-being, like school areas or places where seniors gather. Getting it passed took a lot of work, but it's a testament to the people who are on the front lines of these issues. 

What are the biggest challenges or frustrations you've experienced in the job?

Eiss: A more challenging aspect of our job is how engaged our naysayers or detractors are. We've had to think carefully about how to respond to them, to know when it's appropriate to engage with them versus when to make sure that our staff feels safe.

Do you mean like online or at an event like a protest or rally?

Eiss: All of the above. Regularly, our staff is going to community board meetings where people are spewing disagreement with them politely or impolitely. Coming from the immigration world before this, where there's a lot of haters, I wasn't really expecting there'd be so many haters in the transportation field—but was surprised to learn that there are. 

What hacks, for lack of a better word, have you found for dealing with that?

Eiss: We make sure our staff understands that their job is never worth any fear to their personhood or their psyche. They know they're free to disengage at any time. We make sure we have private security at events we hold. We have safety plans for all the things we have control over.

Adams: In terms of another challenge, this is a city of more than 8 million people with a lot of complexities around policy. Our issues touch everyone and there are so many stakeholders working to make change. It's a lot of balls in the air.

So the challenge is balancing all the stakeholders?

Adams: Yeah—and really being attuned to how our issues play out.

Can you be more specific?

Adams: There are always a lot of moving parts around our issues.

Can you give an example of what you're talking about?

Adams: Okay, so this is an honest answer. I think that one thing we're really trying to think through is how you both advance proactive solutions while engaging with communities at a really thoughtful, honest level. Sometimes we're moving forward projects like a new protected bike lane and there are folks in the community for whom the bike lane is a proxy for a lot of other things that have changed in the neighborhood.

Oh, you mean like gentrification?

Adams: Yeah. So it's holding both of those things and asking how do we advance measures that are good for transit and public space while having an honest conversation with folks who have really felt unheard and left out and disrespected for years. That's very challenging and something that we talk about a lot. But doing the real work takes a lot of time and is sometimes messy. We try to move forward with respect, openness, thoughtfulness and humility. •