We, as bicyclists, felt singled out for a while, thinking the bill was targeting us specifically. In reality, all progressive transportation proponents, organizations, and advocates are in the same boat. We're a bit different, and took a different kind of hit because funding has been cut across the board for our programs. Advocates for biking and walking helped turn the tide over the last few weeks. Originally there was a push to eliminate all funding, and even eligibility.
The program which allots funding to states has been renamed Transportation Alternatives (combining Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to Schools, Recreational Trails, and other uses like environmental mitigation and other road uses). "Alternative" is not my favorite term when referring to bicycling, because it shouldn't be considered as a second-class or afterthought way of getting somewhere. It's not an alternative. It is what it is: fun and safe and efficient. Funding for the now-Transportation Alternatives program (Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to Schools, Recreational Trails) has been cut from $1.2 billion (fiscal year 2011) to just over $700 million (in fiscal years 2013 and 2014. The law did retain the language which increases access for local governments. Here's how that breaks down:
- $85 million - Recreational Trails Program
- $308.5 million - States must distribute funding based on population. So if 30% of the state is rural and 70% is urban, then 30% must go to bike projects in rural areas and 70% to urban areas. Funding for urban areas will flow through the metropolitan planning organization (MPO).
- $308.5 million for grants (run by the state for which local governments can apply)
Unlike before, states can now opt out of this funding and allocate it for other projects. They can transfer up to 50% of the funding to any program they want. The overriding theme is state flexibility. State likely won't hold onto extra money for CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality).
CMAQ funding, unlike before, will now be available for construction of single-occupancy vehicle lanes and turn lanes. This will make it very hard for local bicycle programs to receive funding for their projects because they will now be competing with auto-centric projects that benefit bicyclists very little, especially in states just recently getting into bicycle infrastructure and programs.
The somewhat controversial language requiring bicyclists to use a separated path, if present and less than 100 feet from the roadway, remains in the bill.
The somewhat controversial language requiring bicyclists to use a separated path, if present and less than 100 feet from the roadway, remains in the bill.
At the state level, the requirement for a state bicycle-pedestrian coordinator is still in effect. The Safe Routes to Schools coordinator position is eligible for funding but not required (even though SRTS is not eligible anymore for Surface Transportation Program funding).
The most important clearinghouse project/website for bicycle project funding, bicyclinginfo.org, is no longer funded in the new Transportation Bill.
This bill has been identified as a jobs bill and has links to student loans and other muddying aspects. Because of the connections and labels, no one wants to oppose the bill only months before an election. Thus, many supporters of America Bikes, League of American Bicyclists, etc., will probably vote in favor of the bill. No one wants to be labeled "anti-jobs creation". Many supporters fought hard for these programs over the last few years and behind the scenes for much of the project.
The bill, if it passes (which is almost 100% certain), will run for two years from October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2014, at which time Congress will need to draft a new (and hopefully improved) Fed Transportation Bill. If the bill does not pass (highly unlikely), the USDOT will shut down on Monday. No one wants their vote to be responsible for that.
Here is what you can do to help:
Focus on your mayors, governors, state legislators, and other local representatives to shore up funding while we still have it. The positive side of this is that it is still June, we have another 3 months till the bill goes into effect, and we have time to work with local governments and representatives to make sure that our state does not opt-out of the funding that we can receive for bicycling-related projects.
Please work hard with your representatives to ensure bicycling projects are funded in the future.
America Bikes hopes to have a complete analysis of the report for us by tomorrow. As of now, they strongly oppose the bill. They did a great job at explaining the bill and answering questions after only having access to the literature for a few hours. Thank you again, Caron Whitaker, for your explanation and work in informing and working with all of us.
It also includes the silly side-path language on Federal roads in national parks.
ReplyDelete‘‘(d) BICYCLE SAFETY.—The Secretary of the appropriate Federalland management agency shall prohibit the use of bicycles on eachfederally owned road that has a speed limit of 30 miles per houror greater and an adjacent paved path for use by bicycles within100 yards of the road unless the Secretary determines that the bicyclelevel of service on that roadway is rated B or higher." The law does not say that the path must be usable -- contrary to the laws of all the states including those with mandatory sidepath laws, except Oregon, whose mandatory sidepath law is unenforceable. The Federal bill also does not indicate that the path must parallel the road or need serve the same destinations. That was not mentioned. There is no legal definition of level of service B but the unofficial definition would require bike lanes. In my own state, the very lightly-traveled and popular roads in the Cape Cod National Seashore would be off limits unless the Secretary rules otherwise.
And here is the response from a friend in the Forest Service who had not heard about the side path rule....
ReplyDelete@#$%^!* , but thanks for sharing. :)
What may I ask is a separated path? Do they mean bike dedicated paths, multiuse trails, sidewalks? Also what if this "separated path" doesn't have nearby access?
ReplyDeleteThank God the police department in my area isn't quite that bored!
"Last night, in the final hours...";
ReplyDeleteAnd in the NEXT ELECTION!!!