Transpo Chair Mica wants to eliminate federal funding for biking/walking. Vote NO in poll & leave a comment http://bit.ly/kJbvXP
"Mica told the Orlando Sentinel he wants to add flexibility to how states spend their share of federal gas taxes by cutting back on mandates. He added that states still could spend on bike paths and sidewalks if they were a priority."
Mm hm, because politicians always hold bike/ped facilities in high regard, I'm sure they'll be kept a number 1 priority. But good to have that flexibility just in case they AREN'T. ::eye roll::
done. Apparently bike advocates are all over this because the no's are killing (90%).
Not sure if this matters. If the planning and design guidelines remain - which include bike/ped - when using federal dollars, then I look at the prospect of this legislation as eliminating the hastily produced, ill-conceived bike/ped project that was pushed through just to meet quota or create jobs.
I figure no harm, no foul as long as the inclusion of bike/ped transportation remains within the scope of all federally funded projects.
Or am I just not comprehending Mica accurately?
I agree with sloaps. The 'stimulus' spending on bikes in my area seemed to consist of Valley Forge National Historic Park repaving the park's bike trail, a trail that was in perfectly good shape as it stood. PA spent its 'stimulus' money repaving perfectly good roads. The only improvement I saw locally is a paved side path on the wire-grate bridge on Pughtown Road - the Crush the Commonwealth riders crossed it last week.
done.
I voted "yes" because the poll is meaningless. It doesn't match the description of Mica's bill.
Instead of voting No to Mica. Why not vote YES to Matsui.
Like I stated above, let Mica make funding unlimited... so Matsui can ensure bike/ped concerns are covered on all federally funded surface transportation projects.
Now it's all down to Barbara Boxer .
It seems the issue is the elimination of programs like "Transportation Enhancements" and Safe Routes to School, and not simply eliminating the 10% mandate.
Bummer. Though we still don't know what the Obama Administration will propose, as they're backing away from the draft leaked to the public last week...
SRTS is an awesome program. My local municipality (Penn Hills), cuts all sidewalks from any proposal and even removed some already installed sidewalks because they're too "expensive" and people don't want them. I did the math - if every land owner's tax were increased by 20$ a year, that money could put down 1 mile of permeable sidewalk (recycled rubber not concrete) that is lower maintenance than the crap shoulders people have to walk on now. Maybe the code isn't structured appropriately, but it wouldn't take an act of congress to fix that. They just wont exert themselves, and my lazy neighbors won't vote them out or speak up. Most municipal meetings have all of three people at them.
A local group applied to SRTS, and got rejected for total lack of municipal support, becaue the municipality offered ZERO assistance, and recently CUT the .25 miles of sidewalk required to link the new school with the library (wasn't worth it). Jagoffs.
I'm all for eliminating stupid mandates that require places to repave perfectly good pavement. But that's not necessarily the mandate's fault, it's asshattery in implementation. THAT's what I'm against. Idiotic implementation of ideas that could be used for good.
