From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: CMA Meeting Alert 1-7-92
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:50:24 GMT

In article <lkm65tINN7sg@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> bm@bike2work.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Michel) writes:
>   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.  

Excuse me?  You're complaining that 'only' 1/5 of the money paid in
by folks for activities *other*than* mass transit is being spent on
mass transit?  Doesn't sound too dismal to me.  Indeed--it looks quite
generous.

>This is completely unacceptable in my mind as I'm
>sure as well in yours.

Wrong.

>   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.  

Is that "our...dollars" in the sense that there's a pot and you want
to grab some (or think it's there to be grabbed) or "our...dollars" in
the sense of "I paid it--I want to get the benefit in how it's spent"?

>   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). 

Are you trying to say that UNcongested roads and intersections will
*not* help people get to their destinations in a 'timely manner'?  Do
you have some definition of 'timely' that I'm not familiar with?

>   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.  

If such a lobby exists and is as strong as you imply--why is  transit
getting *any* gas tax money?

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

Let's average that at 3....  $2 million plus for a BUS?  Which parts
have the gold plating?

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

One presumes this is for navigation and congestion avoidance aids.  If
it works for cars--it'll work for cabs and busses, too.  (At least
those busses that can do at least some alternative routing...)

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

Sounds like a reasonable use for Sunnyvale--and cheap at the price.
:-)

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: ba.transportation