The confusion over the "parks" issue is because the money is being put in the parks department according to the fiscal note. Why is the money going to parks and not David Dryer's section where the bike coordinator is? And, $100,000 is not a rounding error when there are many services the Mayor couldn't find the money to fund, like ice skating rinks, and community services, and staff for the council, and government television and Arthur Ross's position and on and on and on. In a year of "tough choices" to keep taxes low because of the economy, this is not a small deal. It's 1/10th of the fund that is used to pay for police over time, extra costs for snow plowing and other emergencies. This should be considered with the budget along with all the other city priorities. I'm sure its a great program, but I'm not sure this is the time to be doing it with this money.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Eric Sundquist <[email protected]>wrote: > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
