From: bm@bike2work.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Michel)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: CMA Meeting Alert 1-7-92
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:37:01 GMT
Reply-To: bm@bike2work.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Michel)
Distribution: ba
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.  Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: bike2work

Alternative transportation activists:

   I would like to alert everyone to what I believe to be the!!
   most important public meeting to happen this year.  It is the
Congestion Management Agency (CMA) meeting occuring this
Thursday, January 7 at 7PM, downstairs in the County building
conference room.
   The reason why this meeting is so important is that the CMA
   will be deciding what projects will be funded for the 1994
RTIP (Regional Transportation Improvement Plan) and the 1995
STP/CMAQ (State Transportation Plan/Congestion Management-Air
Quality).
   If you don't really understand what this means and appears
   overwhelming, don't worry.  I'll go ahead and do a quick
summary on the CMA and its funding.
   Proposition 111 forced the creation of congestion management
   agencies as well as directing the gas taxes to be raised (5
cents in 1990, 1 cent in 1991, '92,'93,and '94) ostensibly for a
variety of transportation improvements.  Transit activists
(nievely) believed that this money would go towards alternative
transportation modes, but nothing could be farther from the
truth.  Last year's submittal for the 1993 RTIP and the 1994
STP/CMAQ netted a dismal 20% of the monies towards non-roadway
projects.  This is completely unacceptable in my mind as I'm
sure as well in yours.
   As activists we need to present a strong showing at the CMA
   meeting to voice our displeasure with what they are doing.
This organization is not elected by the people, but has the
power to request funding for more than $750 million in projects
this year.  In effect, this is a rogue government.  We need to
tell them what we think about how they are spending (more like
wasting) our precious transportation dollars.  Bruce Casonovic
(transportation aide to Supervisor Diridon) asked our
Transportation Committee of the Sierra Club to write a letter to
CMA executive director Michael Evanhoe asking that the CMA
support some recommendations by the Santa Clara County Transit
District Board which included a 50/50 transit/roads split.  I
sent the letter off to Mr. Evanhoe but unfortuately I don't
expect it to have one iota of effect on CMA decisions.
   The method in which this list of projects was formulated.
   There is a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which is
largely made up of the traffic engineers from all the cities in
Santa Clara County (whose job success depends on whether the
roads and intersections are uncongested, not whether more people
are actually transported to their destination in a timely
manner). The TAC has chosen the final list of projects that will
be submitted to the CMA board for approval this Thursday.
Although the TAC meetings are open to the public, but I
seriously doubt if any members of the public have ever attended
any of the TAC meetings since the meetings are scheduled during
normal work hours when most of us are at work, obviously.  I
don't think that there was ever an attempt to reach out and ask
the public for their involvement, either.  Sorry I sound so
cynical about the whole process that the CMA follows but I am.
It is completely rigged and they know it. No ifs, ands, or buts
about it.
   Urban ecologist Jane Holtz Kay was right when she said that
   we must fight for every sidewalk, every bikeway, and every
transit line against that ubiquitous highway lobby.  To
paraphrase, we have met them and they are the CMA!  Here is a
breakdown on the projects to be submitted to the CMA board on
Thursday:

Percentage of total roadway dollars:  
Campbell        1.2%
Cupertino       1.9% 
Gilroy          1.9% 
Los Gatos       5.2%
Milpitas       30.9% 
Morgan Hill     3.3% 
Mt. View        4.1%
Palo Alto       3.0% 
San Jose       27.7% 
Santa Clara    12.5%
Saratoga        0.9% 
Sunnyvale       7.3%

Percentage of total dollars to transit: 42.4%

Examples of projects of dubious value:

1. Reconstruct 880 interchange @ Dixon Landing to allow widening
to 8 lanes.
	Cost: $40 million!

2. Purchase 2-4 shuttle buses to serve Downtown SJ-Airport
corridor.
	Cost: $6.27 million

3. Global positioning system, 400 intersections, San Jose.
	Cost: $3.25 million

4. Hwy 280 ramp access, 7th St. to Almaden Blvd.
	Cost: $18 million!

5. Construct urban interchange, Montague @ Mission College.
	Cost: $15 million!

6. Chip seal, slurry seal, and overlay, Sunnyvale.
	Cost: $1.8 million

7. Central HOV lanes, Lawrence to 101.
	Cost: $5 million

8. Park & Ride Lot, Eastridge, 50 spaces.
	Cost: $500,000

9. Traffic Authority Projects (I thought the old Measure A took
care of this).
	Cost: $20.6 million

10. Hwy 87 HOV lanes.
	Cost: $33.5 million

11. Hwy 101 widening, Burnett Ave. to Bernal Rd.
	Cost: $24 million

12. Hwy 880/17 widening.
	Cost: $46 million


Thanks for sticking through it all.  Call me if you have any
questions.

				Michael Keenly

				(408)266-8118 h 
                (408)522-335
--
Bill Michel			
bm@eng.sun.com		These views are my own, not Sun's.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation