After reading all of these comments from the members that took the time to write in, I really don't see any positive remarks (except from paid ATA staff). I showed up at the widely advertised "Members Meeting" downtown a few months ago and there was only about 20-25 members there. CBF always claimed to have 6000 members. I wonder how many renewed the ATA membership. Oh I can't wait to say I am a paid member of ATA. Do I also get discount airfare and free parking at Midway? I have given ATA several ways to save my CBF membership. I have suggested that they come up with a "Bike Advocate" membership category. But, they say that this might water down the ATA name and mission! They also said it would be difficult to work out with the accounting side of things. I think that the long time supporters that helped start this great organization are worth a little work. Since you sprang this whole marketing campaign on us, you need to throw us a bone and let us support the mission that we love and put our hearts and wallets toward for so many years. I speak for myself in saying that we are not a rogue gang of cyclists that want to take over the streets and outlaw all automobile traffic. (except for a little critical mass fun) We are just bike advocates that live and ride in the Chicagoland area, we are passionate about cycling and want to support it!
We understand that you spent a lot of time and our money on this new change, with out our knowledge, now its time to adjust your membership and mission to get us back. Show us you can be flexible and conscientious to the two-wheelers that gave you birth!

Thanks for deleting my posts. That's obviously what you think of your members.

In other news, anyone know of a good Bicycling organization in Chicago I can join ?

Both CAMBR (Chicago Area Mountain Bike Riders) and now the Chicagoland Bike Federations are moving in new directions. CBF, I mean, ATA might stand a chance, given time. CAMBR -- history, imploding. With CAMBR all the old, seasoned, dedicated people are being tossed out for new and improved (and not as politically savy) impatient kids, with grand dreams. CAMBR will be gone within 6 months, let's hope CFB, I mean ATA, fairs better.

As someone living out in the burbs, I didn't connect with CBF, seems they were focused on things east of Cicero Ave (I say that because I live south west and Cicero is "the line"). Not to forget I work 20 miles west of where I live in the southwest.

Did the Drive three times, volunteered 4. Member of the old Club Presidents Council.

Bike advocacy is dead.

To put it bluntly, this sucks. I've been a member for three years and to see CBF try to genericize itself to the point of absurdity makes me wonder if my membership fees could have been better spent. We went from a logo that showed a human being riding a bicycle under the Chicago skyline to something that is closer to the Windows Virus Defender logo. This is supposed to be a bike organization, not some government kiss-up group that seeks to win favor with the Chicago politicians. Lame. Lame. Lame!!!

Couldn't this have been announced 2 weeks ago BEFORE I got the CBF logo tattooed on my arm?

I support the name change; I'm reading a lot of emotional responses but am not finding much substance as to why people are upset. I'd like to see one (or some) example of what you have now that you won't have a year from now because of this name change. I'm pretty sure a staffer could respond and assure you your programming will be intact.

I will also point out that from a programming point of view, the change is not sudden and out of the blue. The direction of progressing cycling by embracing the big picture has been a years-long movement; if you have been an active member and have read Bike Traffic, it's hard to imagine missing the philosophical background of the changed name.

I'm pretty sure we'll still do cycling well by supporting this organization.

And at least you don't have an outdated brand tattoo.

Is my Chicagoland Bicycle Federation membership card still good for discounts?

By changing the name with little to no consultation of the membership, I feel cheated.

I agree with the person who said Active Transportation sounds like corporate doublespeak, like you are ashamed to include the word bicycle in the group name.

ActiveTrans = New Coke

Time to dig through the recycling to find that flyer from the League of Illinois Bicyclists.

When I read some of comments about the transition from CBF to Active Transportation Alliance I must say I'm offended. As a board member I can tell you that my fellow members give the utmost consideration to the direction and operation of this organization.

I must applaud all the anonymous posts as if you worry about the KGB. Why comments that are so mean spirited? Indeed witness the comments in this blog that are ascribed to a member of the San Francisco Bicycle coalition. Its hard for me to believe a true, committed professional would besmirch the motives of an ally whose goals parallel their own. Many people ride bikes around in their own world. CBF didn't just organize big bike rides. Our work has been to create the movement that changes the paradigm, truly the concept of how to integrate cycling and all human transportation into an interconnected and responsive system. Contrary to beliefs expressed by some in this blog, we all share the same rights of way and the sooner we acknowledge all the users of the public way the better it is for each one of us.

And what about the doubters. Have you forgotten why you were a member of CBF? As Andrew so eloquently stated we are the same people we were before the name change. And yet as a Caterpillar becomes a Butterfly, the CBF has evolved to cover more ground to survive. As a great man once said ' Oh ye of little faith..' Have we not served you well up to now? If you were with us before, you need to be with us now. For we are going in the same direction. Create a new cycling advocacy group? How about working with the one you have helped create make this transition. Remember CBF was created from nothing. Active Transportation Alliance starts from where CBF had grown and we will all better for it.

I think the change is a smart move. I’m an avowed pedestrian and transit-user. My husband and I are car-free, but, frankly, we’re both scared to ride our bikes on city streets. I’m glad there’s a strong, well-established group representing me – finally. I guess I don’t understand the animosity between pedestrians and bikers. I may be a big weenie about riding my bike, but I don’t believe bikers are the bain of my existence or somehow sucking up my resources. Cars – now that’s a different story.

I predict the organization will gain a new and larger following of people who can see the commonalities between walking, biking and transit use.

Congratulations Active Transportation Alliance on the new look! I am excited to see advocacy groups, and the environmental movement more generally, starting to think more holistically. It isn't just about bicycles, but livable communities, healthy people, and safe streets. As we start to view these challenges in the context of the systems that they are a part of, our interventions will only be more effective and efficient.

I have no doubt that the ATA will continue to do great work, and help make Chicago a better place to live.

Cheers!

Come on people!
CBF has not abandoned bicycling by becoming the Active Transportation Alliance.
Your membership dues are not being rerouted to the CTA -- with about 6000 members and a $3 million budget, the funding works out to about $500 per member -- that's money that comes mostly from grants and sales of services (mostly relating to bicycles). And that's money that comes back to bicycling in Chicago. Grant money isn't wishy-washy -- it's fixed into specific programs. Of course there will still be bicycle grants. Probably there will be more bicycle grants. it's going to be ok. Members will still benefit from the organization.

If you are scared that bicycling is somehow being neglected by the organization with a new name, go to the office, walk around, and see what is going on. Everyone is very friendly as they continue working on bicycle issues.

The following isn't meant to be negative. Since the drama is high, here is a made-for-TV type version of what I envision happened and why there are feelings of betrayal.
It's an account made of whole cloth, but I feel better now having spewed.

1. Well-meaning board member attends a conference on “Strategic Alliances: The New Global Scope” or some such jibber jabber.
2. Now a believer, board member sells the president and introduces a consultant.
3. Various management sheep buy into the consultant’s Powerpoint and luncheon.
4. Consultant sends in good-looking closers who have boned up on some bike-speak.
5. Consultant starts taking over entire segments of marketing and strategy. Sheep find consultant to “really understand the mission”. Consultant is given carte blanche to do anything in efforts to “revitalize” the agency.
6. Anyone who disagrees is deemed “not with the program”. They might get a gentle talking-to by the president the jist of which is “You are valued. I wouldn’t have this talk with just anyone. I know you have doubts, but I need you to stick this through with me. Think of the mission and all we still need to achieve. Please be part of the TEAM.”
7. Addressing these concerns, the consultant conducts an unscientific survey and keeps one hundred of the most favorable results. The questions are things like: “Which do you favor- Active or inactive lifestyle”.
8. The result of the survey “prove” the consultant is on the right track and is in tune, though she is not from Chicago nor does she ride a bike.
9. More luncheons.
10. While everyone is distracted with the Presidential election, consultant conducts some focus groups about “visioning” and “branding”.
11. Consultant rewrites the mission statement to be more in line with the major donor focus.
12. Consultant, with the president’s help sells the board again. The board is the main sell. The membership numbers are not stable, so consultant does not open that can of worms. Instead, focus is on “the holistic”.
13. Management goes on a retreat and comes back “with a really good feeling”.
14. Everyone high-fives each other.
15. Everyone is excited about the rollout.
16. Membership is pissed. The staff is surprised. The consultant is gone.

This link is from the San Francisco Bike Blog. In it, blogger Peter Smith summarizes this particular issue, and reiterates memberships' concerns about the secretive way this change was approached. In this blog, Smith makes the following statements:

It’s pretty shocking. Not only was Executive Director Rob Sadowsky in on it, but the entire Board. Not a single one of them objected to the tactics? Not a single one of them resigned their Board position when the decision was made to carry out this plan without consulting the membership? Absolutely incredible.

I’m not sure how something like this happens, honestly. There had to be a lot of people who really believed that their members were imbeciles.

OK - so what now? Here’s what should happen:

Huge apology and begging of forgiveness from Rob Sadowsky, Executive Director. It was a colossal mistake on my part - it should have been done differently - I am most responsible - blame me - etc. We screwed up, but mostly me. I acted like a dictator. There’s no excuse. I’m ashamed. Horrible. These are the types of things that should be said, explicitly. Ask for forgiveness on the basis that you will make things right as much as possible. You messed it up, Rob - you fix it. Offer to resign if you do not fix it. Mean it. (And, Peter Smith is not suggesting that you should be spared the unemployment line.)
Announce that the entire scheme - the entire name change, the entire mission change, all of it - is on hold until further notice. What does that mean? It means it’s on hold. Do I have to spell it out? No new business cards. No new membership cards. No new letterhead. No new mailings. Nothing. Not until we sort this out.
Convene an emergency session with the Board as soon as possible - hopefully within the next 5 business days. We’re going to take a whole new approach to this - a better approach - the approach we should have taken in the first place. It will be open and democratic and we’ll have clear lines of communication with the entire membership throughout the process. At the end of the day, some of us will not be happy with the results, but that’s democracy.
Continue to invite any and all comments about the situation to me, directly, or to staff. There is no hurry, though. We should have been listening before, but we’re listening now. Everyone will have a say. Everyone will be heard. Everyone’s opinion is important. You simply must remain a part of our organization. We have to stick together. But please spare us the bile. Your anger is justified, but we’ve already had enough abuse. We screwed up. We’re human. We’re working to fix it right now. Please be part of the solution.

__________________________________________________
And that, my friends, is an outsiders opinion.

You can read the entire post here:
http://bikeblogs.org/sf/2008/11/19/chicagoland-bicycle-federation-become...

I don't think that average pedestrians nor CTA users will join the ATA as members. If cyclists are to be footing the bill i hope the programing and grant writing will reflect that, even if the name no longer does.

We can assume that this change was well thought out -- of course members were involved in discussions, all sides considered, etc. It really isn't possible or desirable to involve all 6,000 members in a dialogue. It might not be a perfect name, but we were never really a federation, and have been active in other (related) matters for years and years. Rest assured that you signed up for is still here.
If you are concerned about changes, or a reduced bicycle focus, contact the volunteer coordinator and put yourself squarely, literally and physically, behind Chicago's #1 bicycle advocacy group -- the Active Transportation Alliance.

I'm not going to lie and say that this doesn't sting a little bit, deep in my BikePride heart. Honestly, what real pride do you feel about taking the bus or walking to the corner store? Not nearly as fulfilling.

But, I encourage you to check out another organization that I really hope we can compare ourselves to in the future - New York's own Transportation Alternatives. Please spend some time looking at their website and watching some of their 'StreetFilms'. Perhaps it will ease the sting to see others who have expanded missions beyond bicycling and all the good that can come of it. It's the least you can do before making the decision to abandon the cause:
www.transalt.org

Remember, advocating for transit and ped is just bigger picture. It's the same umbrella cause as bicycle advocacy. If you really sat down and listed the goals of transit/ped advocacy, it'd look very much like BikePride - healthier and safer streets, friendlier communities, everyone sharing the road, and overall - FEWER CARS.

Thank you.

I understand their desire for collective grant writing but feel this was the wrong way to go about it. To simply tell their 6,000 existing members hey we changed our mission statement and name is disingenuous. A vote of some kind would have been appropriate given that it’s a membership based organization... clearly those who work at the ATA and the board of directors felt otherwise.

In the grand scheme of things, this really doesn't matter, but it's unfortunate that the new name evokes no meaning, emotion, or passion, and the new logo doesn't speak too many of us either.

Goodluck!

I admit that, when first approved by the board (which I am on), I felt lukewarm, at best, towards the new name and branding. I've been a supporter of CBF's velocentricity and Chicagocentricity, and was worried about losing what we have spent nearly 25 years creating. I stepped back, took some time to consider the simple question with a complex answer: "how can we make biking better?" I’ve realized that the name change is part of the answer.

The first thing to realize is that the CBF you knew and loved 2 days ago is not going anywhere. Nobody is being repurposed from working on bike lanes to working on sidewalk maintenance. The CBF was not infiltrated by walkers looking to raid our resources. What happened is the culmination of over two decades of successes and frustrations. What happened was a small step towards answering that question, "how can we make biking better?"

I reiterate the conclusion drawn by many: cycling does not exist in a bubble, and focusing unrelentingly on cycling does not necessarily best serve "cycling." **Additional** funding opportunities exist for programs that embrace “active transportation.”

At the Active Transportation Alliance, bicycle advocacy is a complicated and serious affair. This group has a huge base of institutional knowledge and experience about cycling advocacy. It's not just calling up the mayor and saying "we need more bike lanes!" It involves focused studies, involved planning, and delicate political involvement. I encourage you to spend some time reading the website, and I hope you will agree with me that the new identity will allow our group to better serve the cycling community.

PS: Show your support of cycling by going to Biketown Bash!

I understand and empathize with everyone's reserved (to put it politely) feelings about CBF's name change. I personally feel like it will open many doors for the cycling community. The expanded mission seems to encompass a broader group of interests, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I think it is a common goal for everyone to make biking, walking, public transit and driving more safe, earth friendly and efficient. By representing a larger group, the Active Transportation Alliance will now be a more credible group to tackle the engineering and planning of roads and intersections, especially as the city of Chicago is looking into creating streets that include better bikeways, pedways and streets. I'm going to wait and see what happens before abandoning my roots and support for the organization that has worked so hard on my behalf for all these years.

Additionally, I really don't feel like we should abbreviate this new name into "ATA". They probably should have thought of a better acronym, but at least for now we should take an extra 2 seconds to actually say "Active Transportation Alliance".

I'm as sad as the next person that we won't be the "biker gang" we once were, but at the same time, I think this can really open doors (as long as one checks for cyclists before opening).

The responses, many well-reasoned, show an emotional undertone. As will mine: After all the skin, bone, fear-sweat, and bike parts lost to self-centered pedestrians and mean-spirited bus drivers, I will not be renewing my membership to this new, general-purpose alliance. Thanks for the great years past.
Marcus - Bike commuter driven into the curb regularly near Union Station

I joined the CBF because I believe that cyclists are rightful and equal users of the public roadways, and should be given the legal protection and the proper respect as such from motorists (including CTA bus drivers, by the way), roller bladers, joggers, and pedestrians. While non-motorized paths are good in some cases, integrating cycling into the roadway grid is essential to keep cyclists from being edged out, whether by building narrow, unlit, shoulder-less roads, bad intersection design, etc.

I also believe in the other side of the equal sign. Cars have a rightful and equal place. Many people get around multimodally. Different tools in the toolbox, and no one is inherently bad. Let the people freely decide what they should use, and don't crimp any one's style. But maybe that's the libertarian in me.

Was there a push from pedestrian and transit user activists to broaden the scope? Why take what appeared to be a fantastically working model and radically change it? For example, the March of Dimes changed its focus from helping children with polio to infant mortality and birth defects because polio vaccine whipped polio, and they needed a new focus to exist. I didn't see any such existential crisis for the CBF.

If anyone thinks because the CBF did a remarkable job in taking on road cycling from a sorry state to its current good state that you can stamp "done" on it and move on, things that were hard gained can slip away easily if people think there's no longer an emphasis on it.

I wish the ATA good luck. It's going to be a bear to follow on the heels of a true legend, the CBF.

Please explain why the Bike Federation, with its healthy membership, long track record of bike and ped advocacy, homey logo, and attractive website (with a catchy address to boot) trades it all for a bland name, sterile marketing campaign, and logo inspired by a bank.

Why didn't you consult with the membership before rebranding? Which commuters, after the latest round of CTA fare hikes, will be clamoring to join an advocacy group? Who, among the walking community, felt hurt by CBF's bike-centric approach? Which legislators do you believe will be more responsive to ATA? What's to say they won't confuse you with the bankrupt airline?