Cycling trails funds at risk in Senate

[Louis]

Got a message from the St Louis area cycling advocacy group today with info on this. I'm not that big into trails, but many others are.

Link to Rails to Trails Info (http://support.railstotrails.org/site/PageNavigator/200909_McCain_Coburn_TE_Attack)

Speak up for Trails, Walking and Biking Now

On Tuesday, September 15, Senators John McCain (Ariz.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.) issued two amendments to the FY10 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill. If passed, these amendments would eliminate the majority of available federal funds for trails, walking and bicycling.

Amendment 2370 would prohibit the use of federal funds for pedestrian or bicycle facilities, efforts to reduce vehicle collisions with wildlife, or other specified Transportation Enhancement (TE) projects if the Highway Trust Fund cannot cover unfunded highway authorizations.

Amendment 2371 would allow states to eliminate spending on TE, the nation’s largest funding source for trails, walking and bicycling. Congress currently sets aside a portion of federal funds for TE to support these projects in all states.

Providing opportunities for Americans to walk, bike and take transit to get where they’re going improves our communities’ health and livability, reduces emissions, creates jobs and save money.

If you know who your senators are, their phone numbers are listed here (http://senate.gov/general/resources/pdf/senators_phone_list.pdf) (in the format 202-224-xxxx). To look up your senators by state and find their phone numbers, go here (http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) .

Next, please call your senators with the following message:

I am calling from (city, state) to urge that Senator ______ vote against Amendments 2370 and 2371 to H.R. 3288. These amendments would jeopardize essential Transportation Enhancements projects such as trails and other walking and bicycling infrastructure. These projects are highly valued in my community, and we need more safe and convenient opportunities to walk and bike. How does Senator _____ plan to vote on these amendments?

It is best to use your own words. If you personalize your comments, please be sure to end your call by asking how the senator plans to vote. This is critical information for us to have, and puts the office on notice that they will be accountable.

Once you have made your calls, please tell us how they went (below) so we can track progress and plan next steps. Thank you.

[Mikej]

The funds usually get used up "researching" how to make the trail / bike path, then they just paint a line on a road with a buses and bikes sign every couple of blocks - all for 7 million.

[Joellogicman]

The funds usually get used up "researching" how to make the trail / bike path, then they just paint a line on a road with a buses and bikes sign every couple of blocks - all for 7 million.

It seems rural Wisconsin anyway has some of the better former rail bike, hiking and snowmobile trails in the Midwest. In fact at the end of the month I am going to spend a week riding about Southwestern Wisconsin up to LaCrosse, with several trails prominent on the itenerary.

Not surprisingly, given how many rail lines were made here, Illinois has a very good net work of former rail paths. The problem is the many short, but problematic gaps in the network. Funding to provide bridges or tunnels or other ways to link trails separated by interestates, rail yards, or industrial centers could make it possible for cyclists to travel all across Northeastern Illinois including Chicago without ever playing tag with autos.

[rugbysecondrow]

It seems rural Wisconsin anyway has some of the better former rail bike, hiking and snowmobile trails in the Midwest. In fact at the end of the month I am going to spend a week riding about Southwestern Wisconsin up to LaCrosse, with several trails prominent on the itenerary.

Not surprisingly, given how many rail lines were made here, Illinois has a very good net work of former rail paths. The problem is the many short, but problematic gaps in the network. Funding to provide bridges or tunnels or other ways to link trails separated by interestates, rail yards, or industrial centers could make it possible for cyclists to travel all across Northeastern Illinois including Chicago without ever playing tag with autos.

There is a nice Mississippi trail network being developed. I grew up in Illinois and visitied Wis often, and the snowmobile routes are extensive. That might be a great ride to do one summer.

Legistlation like this is always hard because the public clamors for cuts, but nobody wants it to be their interests that get cut. It seems that wording still allows for spending so long as the other primary needs are met, which makes sense sinc priorities have to be set somehow. As it stands now, roads are of primary importance to most voters, so that is where the money will go.

[sjbraun]

Thanks. I've contacted Sen McCain's office (my senator,) to confirm this report.
And informed him of my objection to this short-sighted view of solving transportation issues.

[MattTuck]

Not sure how to feel about this.

Do I believe the federal government should be in the business of funding and/or creating bike trails? Probably not. But if they're doing everything else, I guess I want my piece of the pie also.

[Joellogicman]

Not sure how to feel about this.

Do I believe the federal government should be in the business of funding and/or creating bike trails? Probably not. But if they're doing everything else, I guess I want my piece of the pie also.

And pretty much screwed the small U.S. towns which with local economies built around the national - but state funded - routes.

If the Feds can pay for highways they can pay for bike trails.

[Mikej]

It seems rural Wisconsin anyway has some of the better former rail bike, hiking and snowmobile trails in the Midwest. In fact at the end of the month I am going to spend a week riding about Southwestern Wisconsin up to LaCrosse, with several trails prominent on the itenerary.

Not surprisingly, given how many rail lines were made here, Illinois has a very good net work of former rail paths. The problem is the many short, but problematic gaps in the network. Funding to provide bridges or tunnels or other ways to link trails separated by interestates, rail yards, or industrial centers could make it possible for cyclists to travel all across Northeastern Illinois including Chicago without ever playing tag with autos.

Rural is great, Madison is fine, Milwaukee - blows a$$ for cycling.

[CNY rider]

How about we only fund things that the Highway Fund does have money for?
As in, any and all projects only get done when we actually have the money to pay for them?
All this spending of the frn's that the Fed is creating out of thin air, at our kids expense, is going to end very badly.

[Joellogicman]

How about we only fund things that the Highway Fund does have money for?
As in, any and all projects only get done when we actually have the money to pay for them?
All this spending of the frn's that the Fed is creating out of thin air, at our kids expense, is going to end very badly.

Looking for tax breaks tend to love the tax free Municipal Bonds often floated to cover the local share of highway development costs. Treasury bonds are popular with investment funds as well.

Moreover, real estate speculators would hate to have to wait until someone actually has the money to pay for a road that will make their vacant land ripe for development. If that were the case, they may never be able to realize a profit on their investment.

[rugbysecondrow]

Impact fees my friend. Make them fund the improvements or they can develop/redevelop land that that already has services available. That way we slow development, slow inventory, stop chasing our a$$s when it comes to services (water, sewer, 911, schools etc).

This happens to some extent is certain areas with urban growth and service boundaries or where there are higher impact fees, but not enough.


Looking for tax breaks tend to love the tax free Municipal Bonds often floated to cover the local share of highway development costs. Treasury bonds are popular with investment funds as well.

Moreover, real estate speculators would hate to have to wait until someone actually has the money to pay for a road that will make their vacant land ripe for development. If that were the case, they may never be able to realize a profit on their investment.

[CNY rider]

Looking for tax breaks tend to love the tax free Municipal Bonds often floated to cover the local share of highway development costs. Treasury bonds are popular with investment funds as well.

Moreover, real estate speculators would hate to have to wait until someone actually has the money to pay for a road that will make their vacant land ripe for development. If that were the case, they may never be able to realize a profit on their investment.


The popularity of these instruments is not that important to the point I am trying to make; moreover, that popularity probably isn't going to last forever. Woe to us if the Chinese and middle easterners ever decide that they don't love Treasuries any more.
I'm simply suggesting that we stop spending trillions of dollars that we don't have, and handing the bill to our kids. That applies not just to highways but to all the other things the ever-expanding federal government throws our frn's at.

[Joellogicman]

The popularity of these instruments is not that important to the point I am trying to make; moreover, that popularity probably isn't going to last forever. Woe to us if the Chinese and middle easterners ever decide that they don't love Treasuries any more.
I'm simply suggesting that we stop spending trillions of dollars that we don't have, and handing the bill to our kids. That applies not just to highways but to all the other things the ever-expanding federal government throws our frn's at.

My point is that bonds have rich and powerful allies and are not likely to go away without a fight.

[Joellogicman]

Impact fees my friend. Make them fund the improvements or they can develop/redevelop land that that already has services available. That way we slow development, slow inventory, stop chasing our a$$s when it comes to services (water, sewer, 911, schools etc).

This happens to some extent is certain areas with urban growth and service boundaries or where there are higher impact fees, but not enough.

I agree that if impact fees were utilized they would make a huge difference.

If even a percentage of the people yammering about CRA as the cause of the housing collapse would ask how in the world all these (now) ghost commuties were able to spring up in the desert Southwest and Central Florida almost overnight, they would be looking at free flowing highway and other infrastructure money as a large culprit.