I think that getting a set aside - real money for bikes for the next 30 years is critical now. That money is in the measure text as voted on by LA County voters (to modify that requires another vote, or, in some cases, state legislative action.) The guidelines aren't as binding - they can be modified by local agencies... so that's easier to do... once we have funding in place.

If the MTA says "apply for local return money", I think a good strategy would be to see that the funding guidelines for local return dollars are amended.

Right now, in the Local Return guidelines, any bike or ped project that takes place in or near a right of way that at any time in the future may need to be removed for a "transportation project" (i.e. rail or car project) will not be funded.

In other words - they'll fund a road widening "for bike lanes" (yeah, right), but they won't fund the removal of a car travel lane (which is exactly what needs to happen).

$ = billion dollars over 30 years, o&m means operations and maintenance

$15.7B 40% new rail and/or bus rapid transit (mostly rail)
$ 2.0B 5% new project o&m
$ 1.1B 3% rail o&m
$ 0.7B 2% rail capital
$ 5.9B 15% bus o&m and expansion
$ 5.9B 15% carpool lanes, highways, goods movement, grade separation and soundwalls
$ 7.9B 20% local return (to cities and county for potholes, roads, etc.)

So... when asked about bike funding, folks from Metro respond that the local return category is eligible for funding bike projects. I anticipate that perhaps more forward-thinking cities (like Santa Monica, West Hollywood and even LA), will spend some portion of their local return on some bike projects, but, basically bike advocates will need to go to each city and push for money for bikes. There's more money in the proposal for freeway sound walls than there is for bikes.

This bond is expected to be a major source of funding for the next 30 years... If we can get bikes into the measure, even at a low level - one percent - that's a third of a billion dollars for bikes. That will begin to light a fire under local municipalities to actually plan and build bike facilities.

What should a bicyclist do? Here's my suggestion:

1. Attend the Metro Executive Management and Audit Committee Meeting - this Thursday 7/17 at 9am - see http://www.metro.net/board/mtgsched.htm . When they hear the report on the proposed sales tax, let them know that it needs 1% for bikes and 1% for peds.

2. Attend the Metro Board Meeting - Thursday 7/24 at 9am and insist on 1% funding for bikes and 1% for peds.

3. Write your Metro boardmembers - use Damien's letter above as a template - get your letter in by early next week. Probably most influential would be Mayor Villaraigosa and the County Supervisors - but there are also electeds from other cities (Santa Monica, Long Beach, Glendale and Duarte) - see full list at http://www.metro.net/about_us/board/board_members.htm

Sorry, I forgot the details of what I support!

Since they're kind of like legislators for the MTA, we should have something specific picked out, like: 10% of Local Returns money dedicated solely to bikes, 5% solely to peds, the rest of Local Returns up for grabs by all modes.

You know? Something that they can argue with us about over the details, while still agreeing with our sentiment. If we leave the creative thinking to them, we'll get stuffed with another DVD of people biking and waling (like the LRTP video) and litte in the way of results.

I need to look over the agendas and see what's the most appropriate forum... will post more later.

I support this initiative, Damein, and I hope to push things further - opening up Transportation Demand Management funds to bicycle projects, and amending the MTA's Call For Projects funding guidelines to allow Local Return sales tax dollars to fund non-car projects.

Things are moving slowly in the City of L.A. - but who knows? In two years, this area could be moving in a very different direction. Bikes and pedestrian issues are going to continue to bubble up in local politics and news. With an intiative like this I hope we turn that into some tangible improvements to our streets.

Or, they could say that part of the funding for the EXPO Line could go to make certain the entire mixed-use trail that runs parallel is built, instead of the current plan which has a half mile gap.

Or, they could reduce the 15% of the current proposed budget that goes towards highway projects.

There's a lot of things that could be done to have a guaranteed set-aside for bicycle and pedestrian projects. We're not seeking to divide anyone, but rather show what support already exists.

You are pitying users of public transportation against themselves. A page borrowed from the Bus Riders Union suing MTA for trying to build subways instead of buying more buses.

Whose transportation needs does Metro serve if not the pedestrians and bicyclists? If anything we can ask that the Metro line stop excluding bicycles during rush hour as they do now. If that is fixed then every mass transit dollar is a dollar for pedestrians and bicyclists.

If you want to argue about distribution of tax revenue go after the gas tax revenue.

great work!

To whom it concerns:

I'm a transportation policy professional with a San Francisco-based urban policy thinktank, called SPUR, and a long-time follower of transportation policy decisions. I'm writing in response to a new item on LA streetsblog. Congratulations on having the courage to go to the voters with a sales tax proposal to fund transit. Sales taxes to fund transit are not as regressive as many people claim, because the benefits accrue to low-income users, and good transit benefits everyone whether they use it personally or not.

However, I strongly urge you to consider adding at least a 2% set-aside for bicycle and pedestrian transportation and safety. In Alameda County, CA, a few years ago, environmentalists opposed a sales tax proposal because, among other things, it did not include sufficient funding for bikes, and they won. Alameda increased the amount for bicycling and walking and voters approved the tax the second time. In San Francisco's sales tax renewal, fully 10% of our funds were set aside for bicycling and walking. With gas prices what they are, people need the fully array of transportation choices, not just driving and transit, and a growing number of Americans, including folks in Los Angeles, realize this. Two percent is a very small amount to set aside to gain the support of this community, and avoid its opposition.

Sincerely,

Dave Snyder

Dave Snyder
Transportation Policy Director

San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
http://www.spur.org
415.781.8726 x135
dsnyder@spur.org

Promoting good government and good planning through research, education and advocacy