Happy Fourth of July everyone! Streetsblog will be taking tomorrow off and returning on Monday.

Have fun with the cookouts and fireworks, rest your eyes and we'll come back next week ready for the Tom LaBonge era as he steps in as Acting Chair for the Transportation Committee. Try not to panic, LaBonge will be acting as chair until the committee assignments are shuffled after the election of the Council President later this month.

Oh, and for those two readers who link to Streetsblog through a Toronto bike blog, a belated Happy Canada Day to you.

(editor's note: This is the fourth part of our ongoing series where residents defend the "alternative transportation friendliness" of their community.  While I'm still taking submissions at damien@streetsblog.org; I thought I'd share my thoughts on my community.  You can read previous posts on Claremont, Downtown LA and Mid-Wilshire for inspiration.)

When my wife and I first discussed moving to Los Angeles, we had a lot of the concerns that East Coasters, scared by the daunting image of Los Angeles as a Car Culture Capital.  To counter our fears, we used the Walk Score website to pick a community that would at least be walkable.  Thus, we ended up in the border area between the Orthodox Community and West Hollywood, the neutral zone between Beverly and Melrose.

However, this area turned out to be a great place for non-auto transportation.  I now live two blocks away from two bus stops, and have a somewhat longer although easily manageable walk to the Beverly Rapid Lines.  In about twenty minutes, these buses can take me to the Red Line stop at Beverly and Vermont where I can take a train that connects me anywhere.  A three seat ride isn't a perfect trip, but I can get pretty much anywhere I need to go via transit with a minimum of walking.

But the ability to walk to get pretty much anything one wants or needs is the real attraction of the area.  The open-seven-day-a-week Third Street Farmer's Market at Third and Fairfax is the anchor of walkability; but the wide sidewalks and crossings needed by the Orthodox community provides as complete a pedestrian network as you're going to find anywhere in the city.

Food, entertainment, shopping is all a half mile walk away.  For someone like me, that loves to cook, to have access to an organic market, a Ralph's, a Trader Joe's, a Whole Foods and the Farmer's Market all within a mile trip; well, that's a piece of heaven.  And I still haven't even mentioned the Pan Pacific Park right in the heart of the area for anyone looking for some open space.

While nobody is going to mistake Fairfax for Silverlake anytime soon, you have easy access to 4th Street for a relatively easy ride most of the way Downtown and can take local streets to the attractions along Melrose or Hollywood Boulevard.

Fairfax may not be the first place that comes to mind when Angelenos think of car-free, or in my place car-reduced, living; but there is something for users of every mode of transportation.

Meet Gabe Klein who was appointed new director of Washington D.C.'s Department of Transportation (DDOT) in December 2008.  With an interesting background which includes four years working for Zipcar, Mr. Klein was brought in with the idea of looking at the job from a fresh perspective (check out: Potholepalooza!) and innovating solutions to many mobility problems D.C. faces.  Right off the bat, you'll love a lot of what he has to say:

"Cars are a part of our daily life here in D.C. ...but what we want to do is try to equalize the playing field.  Encourage people to walk, to bike, to bike share; or instead of owning a car - car share."

Washington D.C. already has one of the lowest household car-ownership percentages of any major U.S. city, so actively promoting these modes is essential to helping its citizens move about with - as Mr Klein points out - "freedom".

All too often, transit blogs tend to focus on the negative of riding the bus or taking the train.  Experienced riders come off as jaded and veteran activists are just ornery because of the splitting headache earned from years of banging your head into the concrete divider known as the Metro Board of Directors.  I admit to being as guilty of this trap as anyone.  But if you're looking to read something completely different than the griping and moaning, try reading Booking It Bus Style.

Booking It Bus Style isn't a policy blog.  You won't see Rosemary complaining about the Mayor; and complaints about other riders are infrequent compared to more easy-to-read posts about life on the bus and what book is taking up her commute.  You see, Rosemary went from veteran driver, to car-free as quick as one can take keys off a key chain and has devoted her commute to reading and busing.  As a former NYC rail commuter who has abandoned transit for his bike, I had actually forgotten the simple joy of sitting down for a good read after a long day at work.

So if you're looking for some light reading about the joys one discovers when riding the bus when the policy blogs are wearing you down, click on over to Booking it Bus Style and see what new adventure, or new book, Rosemary wants to tell us about.

In Chicago's Southland, Streetsblog Network member Active Transportation Alliance has created a program called Footprints that makes this kind of friendly advice available on a wider basis. Footprints pairs anyone who asks with a "coach" who will "create with you a personalized program of biking, walking, and transit options that meets your needs where you live."

In a recent blog post, Footprints coach Mary Lynn Wilson talked about the work she does:

For most of the people we sign up, using a bike for transportation is a novel experience. Using the recommended streets on the Chicagoland bike maps and having the fledgling go at it would bring their noble experiment to a quick halt. So, we coaches poke through maps, Google and Bing only to be faced with a myriad of cul-de-sacs, canals, railroad tracks and streets where a speed limit is merely a suggestion. Persevere we do and manage to come up with a decent route with minimal fast-moving cars, sometimes connecting the rider with a train or bus. We sweeten the pot by offering to make the ride with them. Never give someone a route you wouldn’t ride yourself.…

[W]e have gotten people from the South Suburbs to downtown Chicago, someone from Oak Forest to Roselle, a teacher from Harlem and Northwest Highway to his school in Orland Park, and an intrepid rider from Tinley down to Kankakee State Park. Some trips are strictly by bike, some by bike/public transportation. And for those who see their commute as too long or too difficult, we continue to encourage everyone to think before they get in their car for that 1, 2 or 3 mile trip. This is where Footprints makes its biggest impact.

Services that help people navigate non-car transport are proliferating. Ride the City, which provides bike routes rated for safety and speed, just expanded into Austin. Google's public transit function is being offered in more and more places. And individual municipalities are working on their own web-based route guides. This is all great news.

But Internet-based guides sometimes struggle with common sense (a recent trip to SF and some frustrating encounters with the MUNI online system were the proof of that for me). Another human being can often do a more nuanced job of evaluating a traveler's priorities and proclivities. So the Footprints idea -- of making transportation advice into a connection between two people -- definitely has a place. We'll check in with them in the future to find out how the service is doing.

Every year on July 1, the Chairmanship of the Metro Board of Directors changes hands.  This year, Glendale City Councilman, and former Mayor, Ara Najarian takes the helm.  While outgoing Chair Villaraigosa is rightly proud of his steering of the Board during the Metro debate, he often seemed bored at meetings and liked to skip "open comment" and just show up to vote.

Najarian's ascension could be good news for bicycle and pedestrian advocates.  Recently, the City of Glendale has forged a partnership with the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition to make Glendale streets more safe for everyone and Coalition staff has nothing but good things to say of the Councilman.  Also, Najarian is one of the few Metro Board members to take time out for events such as "Bike to Work" week kickoffs.

Regionally, Najarian isn't one to make waves; but recently he did earn headlines for his opposition to the I-710 Tunnel Project.  As a matter of fact, a search of the Streetsblog archives only reveals three stories that mention him by name.

With Najarian officially in the Chairman's seat, it will be interesting to see what, if any, changes occur at the policy level or in the way Board meetings are run.  If anyone has any more information on Najarian or wants to give the new Board Chair some advice, feel free to use the comments section as a forum.  Since it wasn't available online at the moment of publication, you can find Metro's press release after the jump.

GLENDALE CITY COUNCILMAN ARA NAJARIAN BECOMES

NEW CHAIR OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Glendale City Councilman Ara Najarian takes over as chairman of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Board of Directors effective today, July 1. He replaces outgoing Board Chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

“As the new Board Chair, I look forward to providing the leadership necessary to enhance transportation options throughout the region,” said Najarian. “This next year will be both challenging and rewarding as we move the agency through difficult financial times while at the same time, begin implementing transportation improvement projects voted by the public with the passage of Measure R, the half-cent sales tax initiative.”

Najarian was elected to the Glendale City Council in 2005 and served as Mayor from 2007 to 2008. He is currently Chair of the Glendale Housing Authority and previously served as Chair of the Glendale Redevelopment Agency. He also served on the Glendale Community College Board of Trustees from 2003 to 2005 and was Chair of the Glendale Transportation and Parking Commission.  Najarian has served as a director since 2006 and also currently serves on Metrolink’s Board of Directors.  

Najarian has been an attorney in private practice in Glendale for 20 years and attended Occidental College where he received a BA degree in Economics and later earned his JD from USC School of Law.

        Metro is the third largest public transportation agency in the United States. It has a $3.9 billion annual budget and more than 9,000 employees. It operates approximately 200 bus routes serving a 1,433 square mile service area and five subway and light rail lines that crisscross Los Angeles County. Metro’s total annual bus and rail ridership exceeds 400 million boardings.

The California Transit Association, that called the winter budget deal that zeroed out the state's operations assistance program "Armageddon," were the plaintiffs in the case that resulted in yesterday's big win for transit.  They celebrated and explained the court decision yesterday.

While the Court claims no authority to order repayment of funds re-routed in past budget deals, the decision means that continued diversion of voter-mandated transit funding is illegal going forward. And that means that approximately $1 billion earmarked for the General Fund as part of current negotiations must be restored to transit.

“The ruling clearly states that the rip-offs are illegal,” said Joshua Shaw, Executive Director of the California Transit Association and lead plaintiff in the suit that was originally filed over $1.19 billion taken from the Public Transportation Account (PTA) as part of the 2007-08 budget agreement. “It says they’ve been illegal since before 2007, and it says that the definition of mass transportation that lawmakers have adopted since then to mask these diversions is illegal.”

Unsurprisingly, the Schwarzenegger Administration is already promising an appeal and is asking the appeals court to stay its decision pending the outcome.

Update: Dana Gabbard of So.CA.TA. sends the text of the decision.  It can be viewed here.

Yes, this film is more "New York Centric" than I would usually cross post here, but I thought the simple illustration of the value of bus-only lanes was a good one and one we could use again. 

The film tracks the growth of New York City, and the number of people taking the bus into the Big Apple from New Jersey over the decades but notes that the bus access to the Lincoln Tunnel and other crossings has remained static.  As more and more people commute into the city from New Jersey; the Port Authority who controls the bridges and tunnels, New Jersey who controls the roads leading into crossings and New York are going to have to figure out more ways to get more people into the city.  Sometimes the most obvious answers are the best ones.  Just increase bus capacity and this particular congestion problem is solved.

Full disclosure: in addition to the obvious ties between LA Streetsblog and Streetfilms, this film's narrator was my boss when I worked at the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

Photo: La Cita Vitta/Flickr

Eight months after Measure R has passed, the Metro Board is finally ready to pass its Long Range Transportation Plan at its meeting on July 23.  Instead of 2008, the LRTP will be passed in the 2010 fiscal year.  Instead of a gloomy "constrained" plan, the Board will be passing a much more robust plan because of the half cent sales tax dedicated towards transportation.

Of course, not everyone was a winner in Measure R.  Despite pressure from 200 people that signed a letter asking the Metro Board for a bicycle and pedestrian set-aside in Measure R funds, so while the rest of the plan is "strategic" funding for non-motorized transportation remains restrained.  Metro staff is quick to point out that municipalities are free to use their part of the 15% of Measure R funds that go back to communities for whatever they want including bicycle and pedestrian projects; but it's still sad to think that whenever the Metro Board releases copy for the final LRTP they are expecting to vote on later this month, the official website hasn't been updated since March 2008, all categories will see larger numbers than originally forecast except the bicycle and pedestrian projects.

But there is some good news.  While the 2008 LRTP said there was $241 million set aside for bicycle and another $241 million set aside for pedestrians; Metro staff is now saying there is actually $324 million each for the bicycle and pedestrian budget line.  Metro staff explains where Metro currently stands in relation to bike and pedestrian funding:

The $324 million identified each for bicycle and pedestrian modes represents a revenue stream reserved for each mode in escalated dollars from 2005 - 2030.  In today's dollars, this would be equivalent to receiving an average of $11.7 million per year each for the life of the LRTP from 2005 - 2030.  That this is a substantial, dedicated long-term investment for bike and pedestrian improvements within our agency’s transportation plan. 

The Measure R Local Return funds are above and beyond what is identified in Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan.  In other words, the 15 percent return is a separate amount of funding that the region’s 88 individual cities have the opportunity to utilize for, among others, bike and pedestrian projects they feel are important. 

That's a pretty big math error, especially since the "strategic" amounts listed for bicycle and pedestrian projects were $368 million per mode in the 2008 LRTP.  We've already made up most of the difference between "constrained" and "strategic" by just fixing a math error.  It doesn't seem like too big a lift for Metro to come with with another $84 million to help non-motorized transportation jump from "constrained" to "strategic" too.

These New Yorkers grew in number by an estimated 53,000 this year. Will they get more power in Congress? (Photo: lukegeorgeson via flickr)

The urban growth is being attributed to a combination of demographic re-arrangement -- younger families are embracing cities as well as close-in suburbs with transit access -- and the unsustainability, both economic and environmental, of living in sprawl.

It's a pattern that nicely underscores the importance of expanding transportation options beyond the automobile. But will the nation's rising cities see a corresponding increase in the political influence that's necessary to move national policy in a new direction? That's a big question.

The 2010 Census will help determine which states gain or lose seats in the House, the lower congressional chamber where proportional representation rules the roost.

And even if urban populations continue to swell over the next two years, it's still highly likely that western and southern states -- where the housing bubble was largest and sprawl remains the norm -- will gain seats in Congress.

"[T]here would have to be a massive reversal of population trends for this not to happen," demographer Andrew Beveridge of Queens College told the New York Times after the 2007 Census. (The New York state legislature is a different story, as Beveridge reported earlier this week -- but then again, control of that body may be more trouble than it's worth.)

New York's congressional representation is projected to fall by two seats after 2010, hitting a low not seen since the 1810 Census. Illinois and Ohio are also expected to lose representation while Texas and Florida gain seats.

It's a prospect that has Karl Rove dreaming of a GOP comeback, and one that should give pause to livable streets advocates who lament the slow progress Congress often seems to make on climate, transit, and other crucial issues.

Senior Democrats such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY), and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) represent urbanites (in San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles, respectively), but their party's 77-seat hold on the House requires constant attempts to compromise with colleagues from rural and exurban areas.

This is how mothers roll in Japan: on a "mamachari." Photo by anthonygrimley via Flickr.

I certainly don’t want to discount concerns about safety and fashion, which were issues for me when starting out and two things Dottie and I are trying to help others overcome.

What annoys me is that none of the articles I’ve read on this topic lately go any deeper into why those things present serious obstacles for women but not men, even though men have the same concerns (no one wants to show up for work disheveled and stinky after all). Why bother, when it’s so obvious that men are just much less self-absorbed and a million times braver? It couldn’t be that there are higher expectations for women’s appearances in the workplace, or that the burden of transporting children or household errands like grocery shopping more often falls to them—the first reasons that came to my mind. These are not insurmountable, of course (just ask these cycling superparents, both moms and dads, or the other stylish women bike commuters we know), but they require some thought, negotiation and planning that your average male might not have to overcome in his quest to bicycle commute.

But instead of giving weight to these concerns, or looking into others, these articles stay on the surface. Women are dismissed as frivolous and their absence is mourned not because of the missed opportunity to allow them to discover an activity that can improve their quality of life, but because their presence would improve the scenery. As a girl who likes to look good on her bike, I can’t argue with that statement, but I can argue with it being the number one reason we should get women on bikes -- sorry, Treehugger.

Network member Fifty Car Pileup, who has written about the gender gap before, also had a thoughtful response to the Times piece.

What makes me sad about this whole debate is that in the United States, we tend to think of ourselves as being especially enlightened when it comes to women's issues. Yet women here are still confronted every day with the idea that being sweaty, or even physically active outside of a gym, isn't feminine. If you're not worried about it yourself, you're constantly being reminded by the media that other, "average" women are. Transporting children by bike is almost unheard of.

Meanwhile, Dutch parents have the Bakfiets, of course. And in Japan, women ride their kids on cycles called "mamacharis," or mama chariots. Maybe we'll get there someday.

Tomorrow, new rules governing how municipalities evaluate speed limits on local roads will go into effect.  Unfortunately, these rules allow municipalities even less room than before to resist speed limit changes.  The new rules maintain the backbone of the bad law, speed limits are set based on how fast the "eighty-fifth" percentile of drivers are speeding but still manage to make it harder for municipalities to resist faster streets for pesky reasons like pedestrians or cyclists want to use the street.

Why does Caltrans continue to push rules that sacrifice the safety and livability of communities to speeding cars?  In short, state law directs them to encourage roads efficient only when they are moving as many cars as possible.  A road with a slower than "necessary" speed limit is considered inefficient.  Those people walking or biking aren't considered at all in these engineering surveys, mistakenly referred to as science by car-loving politicians.

The new language requires that speed limits be set at the closest five mile interval to the "eighty-fifth percentile."  Thus, if fifteen percent of all drivers are speeding by 6 miles per hour over the speed limit, the new limit would be ten miles per hour higher than the current one.  Thus, unsafe driving is it's own reward.  The faster and more unsafe people drive, the higher the speed limit will be on their local streets. 

When the "eighty-fifth percentile" rule was first put in place in the 1996 Manual, the rule asked municipalities to set the limit at the first speed limit below the "eighty-fifth percentile."  Thus, even if a driver were going thirty-nine miles per hour, they could set the limit at thirty-five.  Today, that would not be the case.

There is still flexibility for local DOT's to repress the speed limit by five miles per hour off the new speed; but under the new rules there is a new series of hoops that local officials will have to jump through to keep the speed limits lower.  So if the LADOT is willing to do the work, these new rules will have little impact on our streets as speed limit raises roll through the city in the coming years.

Unfortunately, legislative efforts to amend the laws that create the guides for organizations such as Caltrans; haven't gone very well.  When Valley Assemblyman Paul Krekorian introduced and pushed legislation that would have given communities more leeway; it was stalled in committee thanks to the lobbying efforts of the auto lobby and Transportation Committee Chair Mike Eng (D-Pasadena).  Eng promised that he was very concerned about speed limits going up and vowed to hold hearings to find the best way to ammend the law requiring the eighty-fifth percentile; but that was on May 11 and Eng has yet to act on his promise.

(Photo: theweeklydriver.com)

The EPA billed its decision, which was widely expected and fulfills a campaign promise made by the president, as a return to long-standing precedent of regulating under the Clean Air Act.

But the waiver is likely to bring short-term benefits for California as well as the 13 states that joined its waiver request, permitting that group to impose stricter auto emissions standards between now and 2012.

In 2012, California has agreed to equalize its program with the federal government's, EPA officials explained to reporters today. That paves the way for the Obama administration's 35.5 mpg fuel-efficiency standard to begin taking effect in the 2016 model year.

California lawmakers reacted excitedly to the announcement. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA), referencing the Bush administration's controversial denial of the emissions waiver, remarked: "It should be comforting to know that the [EPA] is now putting science and the law back into the driver's seat rather than politics and special interests."

Meanwhile, the auto industry was as glum as could be expected, given that it has already agreed to the Obama administration's fuel-efficiency rules and agreed to drop all lawsuits contesting the waiver request. "We are hopeful the granting of this waiver will not undermine the enormous efforts put forth to create the national program," Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers President Dave McCurdy said in a statement.

Yesterday, the city officially broke ground on a three mile extension of the L.A. River Bike Path that will take the path from its current terminus at Fletcher Drive all the way to Barclay Drive.  While it's true that you can currently bike along the river in this area; the "path" is in terrible condition with water collecting in dips, uneven surfaces and tree roots forcing themselves through the asphalt.  These obstacles create a rough ride for anyone looking to ride along one of the most scenic parts of the L.A. River.

Joe Linton at the Creek Freak blog covers not only yesterday's groundbreaking ceremony, but in a post from last November researched the "tortured" histories of this segment and another for the West San Fernando Valley.  Officially the Elysian extension should be open in six months, but Linton reports that it could be early 2010 before it's completed.

Construction should be underway this week, with the most significant part of the project being the construction of an underpass below Fletcher Drive. The project is supposed to take six months to complete, though it was suggested that that is slightly optimistic, and could easily take up to eight months. Pardon the dust, and look for a brand new bikeway opening in January or February 2010!

Regardless of the exact date of the opening, this has been a good week for L.A. cyclists.  Combined with last week's installment of new bike parking throughout the Downtown and Westside, that's two stories about better bike facilities in one seven day period!

Amtrak IG Fred Weiderhold left earlier this month after 35 years at the rail corporation. (Photo: WSJ)

The bipartisan congressional investigation focuses on a report commissioned by Amtrak IG Fred Weiderhold several months before his June 18 departure. The report, prepared by the firm of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, confirmed Weiderhold's past contention that the IG's "independence and effectiveness are being substantially impaired" by in-house policies at Amtrak.

But one particular charge in the report caught Congress' attention: that Amtrak managers prevented Weiderhold from monitoring their use of economic stimulus money without their approval.

As the oversight committee's chairman, Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), and senior Republican, Rep. Darrell Issa (CA) explained in a letter sent yesterday to Amtrak chairman Thomas Carper:

[T]he legal analysis found that Amtrak management claims that all expenditures of funds designated for the Inspector General must be approved by Amtrak management. In other words, the Inspector General may not use funds provided by Congress to investigate potential waste and fraud in stimulus programs without the consent of the organization being investigated. This is contrary to the clear intent of Congress and is unacceptable.

In a statement released yesterday, Amtrak noted that it had no opportunity to weigh in on the Willkie Farr report and stated that "there was no relationship between the timing of Mr. Weiderhold’s retirement and this report." Carper added that the rail corporation "would like to maintain an open line of communication
and are looking forward to cooperating fully" with the congressional inquiry.

Willkie Farr's allegations of IG interference at Amtrak ranged beyond the stimulus law. Weiderhold's office began a review of New York's Moynihan Station project in March 2008, focusing on the apartment leased by the project manager as well as "the use of lobbying firms and consultants in connection with the project," the law firm's report states.

But when one of Weiderhold's inspectors tried to get a copy the Moynihan project manager's personnel documents, senior managers would only give him "two board meeting minutes, one which had been redacted," according to the Willkie Farr report. (A copy of the 94-page report can be downloaded here.)

Fallout continues in the wake of last Friday's narrow passage of the Waxman-Markey climate bill, otherwise known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act, in the House of Representatives. Paul Krugman can't believe 212 reps voted against it, while Matthew Yglesias points to a conservative faction that has branded eight Republicans who helped pass it as "traitors."

Global devastation: Not as catchy as "Billie Jean."

There is little about the world we live in and rely upon today that will be familiar or viable in that world just 90 years from now. Water, agriculture, land use, species -- our survivability -- will be in a totally different territory. Really, not just metaphorically.

We need this reality to get at least as much attention as Michael Jackson's death. It should motivate more tweets, more street action, more conversations, more pondering about what life means, makes it worth living, legacies, life potential, and the fate of offspring.

If MJ's death motivated to you spend 4 minutes listening to a song you wouldn't have listened to last week, then email your Senators and tell them the climate change bill before them is far too weak and too slow. Tell them that you'll willing to commit more than $175/year by 2020 in high energy prices (the impact of the House version of the bill), and then start talking with everyone you know.

Also today: Second Avenue Sagas questions the relevance of the Straphangers Campaign; DC Bike Examiner wonders if motorist-cyclist conflicts are over-hyped; Carfree Chicago hopes for a transportation commissioner who gets it; and Bicycle Fixation applauds an effort in the UK to encourage cycling among rail passengers.

The news isn't good.  Despite pretty rhetoric about trying to ween the state off its car-dependency, California is actually spending more of its stimulus funds on highway projects, and highway widenings, than the national average.

Chart: California Public Interest Research Group

That California's roads aren't in great shape isn't news to anyone that lives here, yet the Golden State is spending more money on adding more highway capacity than 41 other states. Eleven other states, including the progressive transportation hotbeds of South Dakota and Alaska, didn't spend a dime on highway expansion.  Meanwhile, California is home to the highway widening that is sucking up more stimulus dollars than any other highway project in the country right here in Southern California.

Of course, using stimulus funds to further the destructive cycle of highway widening isn't just bad transportation policy; it's also bad use of stimulus funds.  Highway widenings are one of the least effective transportation projects when it comes to injecting money into local economies.  A greater percentage of the funds will be used for asphalt and equipment than funding local workers than "fix-it" or other projects.

California didn't just fail to lead the way on curtailing highway expansion, it also failed to take the lead on transit growth as well. That a state government led by a Governor who jet-commutes to work while robbing taxes dedicated to transit to balance the state budget shouldn't be a surprise, but in its press release, CALPIRG notes that there is plenty of support from the Californians that don't own private jets.

When asked in a poll by the National Association of Realtors how they would spend the recovery money, a very strong majority of Americans (80%) said they prefer that stimulus transportation funding be used for repairing roadways and bridges and for public transportation. The public wants a balanced transportation system, as evidenced by local ballot measures like Measure R in Los Angeles to build more public transportation, and the statewide high-speed rail ballot measure passed last fall.

The stimulus provided a chance for states and transportation agencies to begin to make the kind of changes that people are crying out for when it comes to transportation planning.  Few states seem to have made that commitment, and sadly California isn't one of them.