-------- Original Message --------
Subject: How to implement a bicyclist user fee for the Capitol City bicycle highway.
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 09:51:24 -0600
From: Matt Logan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matt Logan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I cannot attend the public hearing tonight requesting input on how to implement a bicyclist user fee for the Capitol City bicycle highway, but I have some suggestions:
First, based on what I have read and heard regarding this issue, I strongly urge the Parks Department to sunset any fee plan after one year. This will give staff the motivation to search for other, more fair funding models that do not penalize bicycle commuting ( an activity the county has a measurable financial interest in encouraging). I also recommend that prior to that sunset, the issue of funding be addressed by the Transportation department, NOT the Parks Department. The reason for this request can be gleaned from the following e-mail snippet:
It was also a consensus of the Commission to send a letter to the bicycle groups and the Transportation Committee to develop a forum in which alternative funding can be developed, through legislative action and the budget process.
To my knowledge, the Parks commission never did that. Several people (including myself) offered to work with Parks to find the funding. Nothing ever came of it. In other words, LePine did nothing to address the funding issue.
Second, this temporary fee should be applied to EVERY USER of the bicycle highway, not just bicyclists. This includes pedestrians and children under 16. This fee should also include any animals that use the path. I have heard that two passes are required for bicyclists riding a tandem (one pass per bicyclist). Therefore it is only fair that a fee is paid for every user of the path, adult, child, or animal, no matter what their mode of transportation along the bicycle highway is. It is unfair to single out bicyclists and rollerbladers as a revenue source, when all the other groups I mentioned are also benefiting from the existence of the bicycle highway.
Third, following from item two: Since not every commuter that uses this path is going to benefit for being able to use a yearly pass on other state bicycle trails, it is unfair that only 70% of the fees collected go to the maintenance of the Capitol City Bicycle Highway. I recommend that the county opt out of the state trail user fee regime and instead implement it's own fee collection regime and enforcement staffing budget. Since much of the potential fee base comes from commuters (a use other state trails cannot provide), it is only prudent that commuter fees be applied exclusively to commuter trails, i.e. the Capitol City Bicycle Highway.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
