George, with all due respect, wackos don't need a reason to complain about
liberals (or about anything else). They killed HSR over the pennies per
household operating cost, and nearly killed health care over fictitious death
panels. There is nothing you can do to satisfy a wacko.
Non-wacko fiscal conservatives, otoh, might realize that that the money here is
a rounding error in the road budget, and realize that the benefits to the city
and its residents are potentially much greater than $100k per year.
B-cycle and other bike-share programs have been great in other cities where,
by
the way, local sponsors always pay for all or part of the cost. They are not
"leisure" bikes, despite Brenda's headline implying they are for park riding.
They are mainly for transportation, though I'm sure some people use them for
fun
as well. You pick one up at one kiosk by your starting point and return it to
another kiosk by your destination. That works great with transit; you can come
to town on the bus and get to a destination that's not right on the bus line.
Minneapolis started its public/private program (not B-cycle, but another
vendor)
last June, and now it is discussing how to best expand it. Denver's first year
was 2010 also, and the results, from a press release:
· Short-term Memberships (24-hour kiosk, 24-hour online, 7-day, 30-day)
Purchased: 32,922
· Annual Memberships Purchased: 1,784
· B-cycle Rides: 102,981 rides
· Miles Ridden: 211,111*
Health benefits included:
· 6,333,332 calories burned
· 1,810 lbs. lost
According to a survey of our members, 43.16% of Denver B-cycle trips replaced
car trips, resulting in the following environmental and economic benefits:
· 312,121 lbs. of carbon emissions avoided
· 9,613 lbs. of toxic air pollutants avoided
· 15,868 gallons of gasoline not used
· $41,256 est. saved on gasoline
· $311,126 est. saved on car parking
*Average ride of 2.05 miles
________________________________
From: George Perkins <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, January 24, 2011 10:12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Bikies] City investing in Rental bikes
I remember the original red bike program, even did some intermittent volunteer
work getting junkers ready to ride. I occasionally rode red bikes (despite
having my own bikes). They were somewhat handy and I was always pleased to see
someone else riding them around.
I paid real estate taxes then, and even more so now. In these times of economic
stress, all of the regional taxing authorities raised taxes. Ouch! The higher
taxes combined with a right-wing noise machine helped elect a tea-bagger
Republican Gestapo State and Federal government and could tip the vote against
many other progressive, needed programs locally, regionally or nationally in
the
coming years. (The RTA’s going to try to get a ¼¢ sales tax referendum to help
fund needed bus service - I can hear the gears grinding already on that one).
Giving the right-wingnut wackos another reason to say “see, I told you so,
those
liberals are at it again” at this time is just plain stoopid.
Instead of spending $100,000 city money this year, $100,000 the following year,
and another $100,000 the year after that for shiny-new credit-card only leisure
Trek bikes, let’s just revive the original red bike program at half the cost or
less. Local bike shops and volunteer organizations could put together a
proposal… Or perhaps keep Arthur Ross’s position in the city budget and fund a
bike/ped manager AND a bike/ped coordinator city position instead?
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
