Comments on: Eric Cantor Postpones Battle Over Safe Routes Funding http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/ Covering Los Angeles's livable streets movement Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:06:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: shout for justice http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-571134 shout for justice Sat, 25 Dec 2010 19:11:19 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-571134 http://www.bridgewaternj.gov/minutes/minutes_view.asp?minutes_id=67 http://www.bridgewaternj.gov/minutes/minutes_view.asp?minutes_id=67

]]> By: Toni Swiger http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-570684 Toni Swiger Fri, 24 Dec 2010 17:25:00 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-570684 You both are totally correct. The bicycle on the road should be required to pay license and registration fee and maybe required to carry Michigan No-Fault insurance. You both are totally correct.
The bicycle on the road should be required to pay license and registration fee and maybe required to carry Michigan No-Fault insurance.

]]> By: Robert Frazier http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569872 Robert Frazier Tue, 21 Dec 2010 13:31:45 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569872 Spoker, You said: "Perhaps if cycling does become mainstream, license and registration would be productive, but we’re not at that point yet." You are correct that license and registration would be productive, and we should be at that point already. Spoker,
You said: “Perhaps if cycling does become mainstream, license and registration would be productive, but we’re not at that point yet.”

You are correct that license and registration would be productive, and we should be at that point already.

]]> By: Spokker http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569788 Spokker Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:37:54 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569788 edit: Rather, there wouldn't be a need for such huge, wide roads. edit: Rather, there wouldn’t be a need for such huge, wide roads.

]]> By: Spokker http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569787 Spokker Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:37:19 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569787 "What I intended is that if you took all the cars and trucks off the road, there would not be enough money from taxes to pay for the roads" If you took all the cars off the road there would be a need for such huge roads, then perhaps it would not be such a burden to pay for roads out of general funds. Also, the gas tax doesn't pay all the costs of building and maintaining roadways. http://subsidyscope.org/transportation/highways/funding/ Also, bicycles do such little damage to the roadway that their tax wouldn't be all the high anyway. Perhaps if cycling does become mainstream, license and registration would be productive, but we're not at that point yet. “What I intended is that if you took all the cars and trucks off the road, there would not be enough money from taxes to pay for the roads”

If you took all the cars off the road there would be a need for such huge roads, then perhaps it would not be such a burden to pay for roads out of general funds.

Also, the gas tax doesn’t pay all the costs of building and maintaining roadways. http://subsidyscope.org/transportation/highways/funding/

Also, bicycles do such little damage to the roadway that their tax wouldn’t be all the high anyway. Perhaps if cycling does become mainstream, license and registration would be productive, but we’re not at that point yet.

]]> By: Robert Frazier http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569714 Robert Frazier Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:33:59 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569714 I did not intend to imply that people who ride bicycles do not pay some taxes. What I intended is that if you took all the cars and trucks off the road, there would not be enough money from taxes to pay for the roads. But if you took all the bicycles off the road there would be very little effect on the money available for the roads. I did not intend to imply that people who ride bicycles do not pay some taxes. What I intended is that if you took all the cars and trucks off the road, there would not be enough money from taxes to pay for the roads. But if you took all the bicycles off the road there would be very little effect on the money available for the roads.

]]> By: Rich Wilson http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569707 Rich Wilson Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:52:10 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569707 "Bicyclist account for about 1% of all travel in the US and they do not pay taxes to maintain the roads" Sigh. That is so old, and so wrong. Most cyclists also own a car. Those few who don't actually SUBSIDIZE the roads for everyone else. Yes, that's right. NON drivers pay for the roads they don't use through sales, property and income taxes. Google will give you lots of references, but this is one of the better ones: http://www.grist.org/article/2010-09-27-why-an-additional-road-tax-for-bicyclists-would-be-unfair "Too many taxpayers pay too much money to give 1% of the population preferential treatment." Time for a sidewalk tax? “Bicyclist account for about 1% of all travel in the US and they do not pay taxes to maintain the roads”

Sigh. That is so old, and so wrong.
Most cyclists also own a car. Those few who don’t actually SUBSIDIZE the roads for everyone else. Yes, that’s right. NON drivers pay for the roads they don’t use through sales, property and income taxes.

Google will give you lots of references, but this is one of the better ones:
http://www.grist.org/article/2010-09-27-why-an-additional-road-tax-for-bicyclists-would-be-unfair

“Too many taxpayers pay too much money to give 1% of the population preferential treatment.”

Time for a sidewalk tax?

]]> By: Robert Frazier http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569693 Robert Frazier Mon, 20 Dec 2010 16:16:55 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569693 I wanted to add that if any government agency decides to increase the costs of processing FOI requests because of multiple or frivilous requests by one person or group of people, the rest of the population of that area is penalized by the actions of an extreme small minority. Increased costs under such circumstances is not fair but somebody has to pay the increased costs associated with the misuse of government employees. I wanted to add that if any government agency decides to increase the costs of processing FOI requests because of multiple or frivilous requests by one person or group of people, the rest of the population of that area is penalized by the actions of an extreme small minority. Increased costs under such circumstances is not fair but somebody has to pay the increased costs associated with the misuse of government employees.

]]> By: Robert Frazier http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569692 Robert Frazier Mon, 20 Dec 2010 16:11:59 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569692 I am a firm believer of the FOIA. It provides everyone with the opportunity to looks at public documents. Unfortunately there are those who will take advantage of the Act to the point that they submit dozens of requests for not other reason but to try to dig up whatever dirt they think they might find, even if there is no dirt to be found. Or they will get a group of people to submit multiple requests for the same information which still takes up additional time to process each request separately. Ultimately it adds unreasonable costs to the majority of people because each request still needs to be processed by one or more governmental employees. If one person were to submit 120 FOIA's to the same local government entity and tie up the office help for a few days or weeks. Why should one person be allowed to do that without accessing additional fees? I would suspect that the local government agency will eventually take up the issue of multiple requests and create a fee system that makes it fair to the entire population base. Bicyclist account for about 1% of all travel in the US and they do not pay taxes to maintain the roads. I do believe that bicycles need to be fairly considered when talking about infrastructure design and use, but too many of these do not consider what the roads and highways are designed for. They are designed for cars and trucks. If the bicycles expect to use the roads then they should be expected to pay their fair share of the costs of designed and maintaining the roadways. Too many taxpayers pay too much money to give 1% of the population preferential treatment. I am a firm believer of the FOIA. It provides everyone with the opportunity to looks at public documents. Unfortunately there are those who will take advantage of the Act to the point that they submit dozens of requests for not other reason but to try to dig up whatever dirt they think they might find, even if there is no dirt to be found. Or they will get a group of people to submit multiple requests for the same information which still takes up additional time to process each request separately. Ultimately it adds unreasonable costs to the majority of people because each request still needs to be processed by one or more governmental employees.
If one person were to submit 120 FOIA’s to the same local government entity and tie up the office help for a few days or weeks. Why should one person be allowed to do that without accessing additional fees? I would suspect that the local government agency will eventually take up the issue of multiple requests and create a fee system that makes it fair to the entire population base.
Bicyclist account for about 1% of all travel in the US and they do not pay taxes to maintain the roads. I do believe that bicycles need to be fairly considered when talking about infrastructure design and use, but too many of these do not consider what the roads and highways are designed for. They are designed for cars and trucks. If the bicycles expect to use the roads then they should be expected to pay their fair share of the costs of designed and maintaining the roadways. Too many taxpayers pay too much money to give 1% of the population preferential treatment.

]]> By: Eva Green http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569488 Eva Green Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:24:16 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569488 What exactly was the reasoning behind the multiple FOIA requests? What exactly was the reasoning behind the multiple FOIA requests?

]]> By: Eve Alone http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-569283 Eve Alone Sat, 18 Dec 2010 17:59:24 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-569283 Talk about wasting taxpayer money. I do not recommend this to anyone, but some people believe that everybody who has ever had to pay a processing fee for FOIA requests can easily circumvent the total costs by conspiring with other people to submit the exact same FOI requests. That way the agency will have to spread the initial fee among all the requests. If you have a $200 fee and then conspire with 4 of your family or friends to submit the same request, they will have to divide that $200 by all 5 of you so that each of you will be asked to pay only $40 ($200 divided by 5). Then, only one of you pays the $40 and your 4 co-conspiracers decline the information. You get the information for $40 instead of $200. Bilk the taxpayer. Quote from the Torch: "That weekend, XLFD (Tom Rotta) organized three other people, including me, to send out our own FOIA request just containing one request, so that we would get the information without the prohibitive, unlawful costs. " Talk about wasting taxpayer money. I do not recommend this to anyone, but some people believe that everybody who has ever had to pay a processing fee for FOIA requests can easily circumvent the total costs by conspiring with other people to submit the exact same FOI requests. That way the agency will have to spread the initial fee among all the requests. If you have a $200 fee and then conspire with 4 of your family or friends to submit the same request, they will have to divide that $200 by all 5 of you so that each of you will be asked to pay only $40 ($200 divided by 5). Then, only one of you pays the $40 and your 4 co-conspiracers decline the information. You get the information for $40 instead of $200. Bilk the taxpayer.

Quote from the Torch: “That weekend, XLFD (Tom Rotta) organized three other people, including me, to send out our own FOIA request just containing one request, so that we would get the information without the prohibitive, unlawful costs. “

]]> By: XLFD http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-535714 XLFD Sun, 25 Jul 2010 07:14:29 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-535714 I agree with Brad; the SR2S program is a big waste of money used for administration, bureaucracy, and duplicative local projects. It is better to encourage your local city councilors and state reps to improve your local infrastructures and safety concerns. Let the Feds use this money to create ways for pedestrians and bicyclists to get past the blockades created by all the limited-access highways they have built without any concern for the non-motorized segment of the population getting from one place to another. Its better than a sidewalk here or there, and safety pamphlets provided at a highly inflated cost by SR2S. I agree with Brad; the SR2S program is a big waste of money used for administration, bureaucracy, and duplicative local projects. It is better to encourage your local city councilors and state reps to improve your local infrastructures and safety concerns. Let the Feds use this money to create ways for pedestrians and bicyclists to get past the blockades created by all the limited-access highways they have built without any concern for the non-motorized segment of the population getting from one place to another. Its better than a sidewalk here or there, and safety pamphlets provided at a highly inflated cost by SR2S.

]]> By: Cory http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-472641 Cory Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:37:19 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-472641 Brad, Regarding duplicative programs, yes the State of California has it's own SRTS program, however that program is primarily geared towards infrastructure improvements (with 10% towards programs like walking buses, bike trains, outreach and education). The federal SRTS is the only funding source that can be used specifically and exclusively towards these types of programs. Programs that in my opinion do alot more for promoting healthy lifestyle choices for kids than any infrastructure and at a fraction of the cost. If you are about saving federal dollars I would urge you to consider the value of a dollar spent on programs like SRTS versus the value of a dollar spent on building massive infrastructure projects. With so much transportation funding spent on freeways, is our government really being good stewards with out tax dollars? USDOT recently published a report that looks at Bicycle and Pedestrian funding over the last 15 years. Bike and peds averaged about 1% with a peak last year of 2%. Two-percent of transportation funding went to bikes and peds and you are looking here for places to cut?! I know when I am balancing my household expenses and need to make some cuts I look at where I am spending the most money. Maybe we can do without one freeway widening and leave some money for our children? Just sayin'! Brad,

Regarding duplicative programs, yes the State of California has it’s own SRTS program, however that program is primarily geared towards infrastructure improvements (with 10% towards programs like walking buses, bike trains, outreach and education). The federal SRTS is the only funding source that can be used specifically and exclusively towards these types of programs. Programs that in my opinion do alot more for promoting healthy lifestyle choices for kids than any infrastructure and at a fraction of the cost. If you are about saving federal dollars I would urge you to consider the value of a dollar spent on programs like SRTS versus the value of a dollar spent on building massive infrastructure projects. With so much transportation funding spent on freeways, is our government really being good stewards with out tax dollars? USDOT recently published a report that looks at Bicycle and Pedestrian funding over the last 15 years. Bike and peds averaged about 1% with a peak last year of 2%. Two-percent of transportation funding went to bikes and peds and you are looking here for places to cut?! I know when I am balancing my household expenses and need to make some cuts I look at where I am spending the most money. Maybe we can do without one freeway widening and leave some money for our children? Just sayin’!

]]> By: Rich Wilson http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-472561 Rich Wilson Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:55:50 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-472561 <blockquote> The proposal to cut taxpayer funding for duplicative bike paths </blockquote> That makes it sound like there will be parallel bike paths between the same two points. I highly doubt that's accurate. For one, SRTS is about more than bike paths.

The proposal to cut taxpayer funding for duplicative bike paths

That makes it sound like there will be parallel bike paths between the same two points. I highly doubt that’s accurate. For one, SRTS is about more than bike paths.

]]> By: Matt http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-472351 Matt Wed, 16 Jun 2010 13:48:56 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-472351 Brad - I've seen several places that the "program is duplicative" but have yet to see a detailed explanation of how this is so. While there certainly are other bike and pedestrian improvement programs, this one is specifically targeted at assisting schoolchildren (who, by the way, are on average getting fatter at an alarming rate). While I understand you personally may not be anti-bike or anti-cyclist, raising this as wasteful at a time when other government programs are focusing on increasing health and reducing our oil dependency seems a bit of a head-scratcher. Brad –

I’ve seen several places that the “program is duplicative” but have yet to see a detailed explanation of how this is so. While there certainly are other bike and pedestrian improvement programs, this one is specifically targeted at assisting schoolchildren (who, by the way, are on average getting fatter at an alarming rate).

While I understand you personally may not be anti-bike or anti-cyclist, raising this as wasteful at a time when other government programs are focusing on increasing health and reducing our oil dependency seems a bit of a head-scratcher.

]]> By: Jessica http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-470491 Jessica Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:45:33 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-470491 Damien - you received 5 copies - wow. It did seem like it moved through lots of networks which great. Thanks everyone who helped! Thanks for the update on the story too. Damien – you received 5 copies – wow. It did seem like it moved through lots of networks which great. Thanks everyone who helped! Thanks for the update on the story too.

]]> By: Damien Newton http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-470221 Damien Newton Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:36:55 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-470221 And let's be nice. Brad only posted here after I got the story wrong... And let’s be nice. Brad only posted here after I got the story wrong…

]]> By: Brad Dayspring http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-470141 Brad Dayspring Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:13:13 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-470141 Cory - Hardly, just was being friendly and since this is a blog for riders, it seemed appropriate. That and I just bought a new bike and was happy to post here. No statement made here or through the YouCut program is "anti-bike" or anti-cyclist. The point is that this program is indeed duplicative, and at a time when our national debt is soaring and Washington is spending $4.8 billion per day, we must start finding ways to save - even small ways. Congress should at least have a conversation about whether this duplicative program is deserving of federal tax dollars Cory -

Hardly, just was being friendly and since this is a blog for riders, it seemed appropriate. That and I just bought a new bike and was happy to post here.

No statement made here or through the YouCut program is “anti-bike” or anti-cyclist.
The point is that this program is indeed duplicative, and at a time when our national debt is soaring and Washington is spending $4.8 billion per day, we must start finding ways to save – even small ways. Congress should at least have a conversation about whether this duplicative program is deserving of federal tax dollars

]]> By: Cory http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-470111 Cory Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:07:14 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-470111 Why is it that every anti-bike statement begins with "Fellow riders" or "I'm an avid cyclist, but..." At somepoint in their lives everyone has been behind the bars of efficient transportation. Past, present, or future; everyone rides bikes! Guilty conscience? Why is it that every anti-bike statement begins with “Fellow riders” or “I’m an avid cyclist, but…”

At somepoint in their lives everyone has been behind the bars of efficient transportation. Past, present, or future; everyone rides bikes!

Guilty conscience?

]]> By: Marcotico http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/06/15/eric-cantor-postpones-battle-over-safe-routes-funding/comment-page-1/#comment-470071 Marcotico Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:52:31 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=53501#comment-470071 Brad Dayspring is a shill. Brad Dayspring is a shill.

]]>