BIKE: Fwd: Factual errors in talk about bicycle funding this morning

[Mike Dahmus]

The morning show on 590KLBJ talked about the CAMPO 15% rule today, and not 
surprisingly, they were very negative. I sent the following note to Mark 
and Ed:

>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:42:19 -0600
>To: mark, ed
>From: Mike Dahmus <mdahmus>
>Subject: Factual errors in talk about bicycle funding this morning
>
>Dear Mark and Ed,
>
>I listened to your show this morning from about 8:00 to 8:30 AM on my 
>drive to work. For background, I'm a commissioner on Austin's Urban 
>Transportation Commission, and occasionally bike to work (obviously not 
>today!). I'm the only member of the commission who both drives to work and 
>bikes to work, by the way. (I work way out past 360 and live in central 
>Austin).
>
>The discussion of the bicycle funding topic on the show this morning was 
>riddled with factual errors that I urge you to correct. I'll provide one 
>simple example; because I don't want to take your time in this email to go 
>into detail on all of them. I would be willing to be at your disposal at 
>any time and by any method to discuss local transportation issues relating 
>to bicycle and road use, especially regarding the other factual errors and 
>misrepresentations in the broadcast.
>
>The one example I'll discuss is the 15% rule, which Ed called ridiculous. 
>Without context, it certainly does sound ridiculous; and Ed presented it 
>as if it were 15% of total transportation funding. Since 0.5-1.0% of 
>transportation trips in this area currently occur by bicycle according to 
>CAMPO's last surveys, 15% would be way over the top.
>
>However, the information Ed neglected to include in his statement was that 
>the "15% rule" applies only to one category of funding managed by CAMPO. 
>When you add in the other categories of funding managed by CAMPO which do 
>not fall under this rule; then add in the spending directly by the state 
>on the highway system in this area; then add in the spending by the county 
>out of general fund revenue on roadways (which bicyclists pay out of 
>property and sales taxes); and then add in the spending by the city out of 
>the general fund (huge amounts of property and sales taxes, again, which 
>bicyclists pay the same as motorists do); it doesn't seem so out of whack. 
>In fact, the last time I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation, I came up 
>with about 1% when you consider all that other funding from those other 
>sources. Not 15%. 1%.
>
>In other words, about 1% of all transportation spending in our area is 
>spent on bicycle and pedestrian projects. That seems pretty reasonable, 
>doesn't it?
>
>If you'd like to discuss why the 15% rule came into place, I have some 
>interesting examples why it's necessary (having to do with roadway design 
>choices by TXDOT severing existing bicycle/pedestrian routes and TXDOT's 
>refusal to build sidewalks on frontage roads even in built-up areas). 
>Other topics that you or your listeners were dead wrong about were 
>bicyclist funding of roadways (see comments about property/sales taxes 
>above) and bicycle usage in our area (drive down Shoal Creek Boulevard or 
>Speedway at 38th in the morning or late afternoon; bicyclists obviously 
>concentrate on good existing routes rather than riding on Mopac or I-35 
>where your car is!).
>
>Please do not allow misrepresentation of the type seen this morning to 
>misinform your audience. Again, I urge you to correct these errors by 
>contacting me or someone else at the city who knows the facts. I am 
>completely at your disposal.
>
>Regards,
>
>---
>Mike Dahmus
>mdahmus

---
Mike Dahmus
http://www.io.com/~mdahmus/  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/private.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info/attachments/20031118/b569d628/attachment.html