|
But my only point was the
lack of parity of the car tab and the city bike path tab. Not all the
issues as to payments of what we accept as collective responsibility.
I only brought up the question of a Madison bike license other than the
one under mandate which can not charge more than the cost of the
license office. I am sure auto licensing is not under the same
strictures and I am aware that one license is a State motor license and
the other would be a Madison bike friendly trail license. In fact it
might only be required on such infrastructure separate from auto use.
We have use licenses for certain parks and facilities, publicly
owned--why not a Madison trails license? EW India Rose Viola wrote: I'm agreeing to disagree. I think biking is inherently good (whatever that means) and you probably aren't going to get me to change my mind, nor I yours. And yes, I expect everyone to help pick up the tab for bike paths etc.My opinion is that we should collectively pay for schools, prisons, hospitals, roads, fire, police, and bike paths (this is not an exhaustive list)- these are entities that should NOT be for-profit as far as I'm concerned. But I s'pose that is an entirely separate debate that doesn't at all belong on bikies, so pardon my overreach. Enjoy your opinions and I'll do the same with mine. Let's spar about something else now :) -india ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Westhagen <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 4:15 pm Subject: Re: [Bikies] Bicycle Counts (was Question on bicycle traffic counts) To: India Rose Viola <[email protected]>, BikiesSubmissions <[email protected]>Dear India Rose, Autos have been licensed since the first cars appeared on the scene. If we are talking universal use, than we should assume that everybody except for the invalid, pretty much gets about with cars, feet, horses, or bikes. Therefore, why not abandon all licenses and "user fees."(for more than surface mainenance--for police and all services with roads) As for your apparent claim that the bike infrastructure of Madison is a separate issue or doesn't bear a "direct" cost not paid in other cities of equal size, tell that to the budget people. And the full economic costs argument can be made from other sides as well and as a result of all sorts of life style changes and prohibitions on chosen human actions. Of course with creative municipal financial cost accounting, who could ever determine the "direct costs" associated with being a "friendly bicycle city." Certainly the auto people would hold bicycles in higher regard if they paid a license fee which went for even the snow removal on all the bike paths. As for multiple use-----yes, the bike paths can be used by other--"silent sports." But long ago sidewalks were also for pedestrians. Bike paths are not called that for no reason. EW India Rose Viola wrote: Eric, Erk. The "special paths" you refer to are all mixed-use paths in Madison, so as soon as pedestrians, dogs, and rollerbladers get a bill, we'll all be even (yes, I'm being snarky). Plus, the paths are Parks Dept. which is separate from Streets Division. As elite as you keep maintaining that cyclists are as a group, I'd argue that most cyclists are also peds and auto drivers- so we are also part of the majority. Yes, cycling may have some up-front infrastructure costs, but each and every time a person chooses to ride their bike INSTEAD of driving their car somewhere they are doing everyone a big favor- in healthcare costs (both short-term in car wrecks, and long-term in maintaining their own health), road wear costs (maybe minimal, but not nothing), airshed pollution, and emissions & fluids that acidify our rain, enter our watershed, etc. I don't think it's smart to try to make an apples-to-apples comparison when it comes to bike and cars, and it's stupid to try to make cars=<>bikes<>=costs<>=fees but if you want to start playing that game, then ounce for ounce I think bikes are going to kick the cars' butts. It doesn't need to be us vs. them, but it would be nice if people (this includes you and me) knew that every time they drive they are putting a burden on everyone. -india *********************** India Viola UW-Madison Stretton Lab 115 Zoology Research Bldg. 1117 W. Johnson St. Madison, WI 53706 608.262.3336 *********************** "How can we learn from our mistakes if we don't first acknowledge them?" -Anonymous "We exist in the bacterial world, not bacteria in ours" -Stuart Levy ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Westhagen <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:35 pm Subject: Re: [Bikies] Bicycle Counts (was Question on bicycle traffic counts) To: "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]>, BikiesSubmissions <[email protected]> Charles, Now I have heard everything. Basing the road repairs on actual vehicle weight when talking about bicycles. Weather, expansion-contraction etc., are the primary determinants on most roads. Certainly if they are not constructed for the weight, weight limits must be posted like on blacktop feeder roads. But I am talking about all the special paths, lanes, snow removal--etc., which makes Madison different from other cities--such as mine. (village). Bikes and pedestrians use these exclusively in greater Madison. Bikes should pay for them or put the entire matter to a public vote. After all, that is what government and voting is for. When government acts alone it is to exert the "will of the few on the many." When a referendum is taken, --the "will of the many on the few." As for the 44% you claim comes from the likes of property taxes--well ask the property owners if they will pay for exclusive infrastructure which excludes automobiles and horses. I have posted the explanation of your Madison current licensing fee which seems to be just a collection to support a Madison office of bike licensing--nothing more. If your bike is stolen and the robber leaves the plate attached, you might get it returned? If the bike community really wants respect that they pay their way?--license for the same fees a cars or something special since I would expect it would only be for the Madison vicinity where there is exclusive bike infrastructure. There is no need for a State-wide fee. You are correct that "out my way" the bike wear and tear is negligible. Eric STRAWSER, Charles wrote: Eric, you are so woefully misinformed about the money. Let me help paint a clearer picture: 1.The City of Madison bicycle registration fee costs $10/four years, or $2.50/year. My ~3000 lb car’s registration fee is $75 annually. So, since one purpose of the registration fee is to pay for building and maintaining roads, and the weight of the vehicle and the miles traveled on the road are some of the biggest determinants of the costs of maintenance, then a “comparable” bicycle license fee, based on the weight of the vehicle, would be roughly 30 lbs/3000 lbs x $75 annually, or 75 cents/year. In other words, bikes are ALREADY required to pay more than three times a proportionally “comparable” license fee. 2. As I have previously posted to this list, a study commissioned by WisDOT in the 1990s concluded that fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees accounted for 56% of the costs of public roads. 44% of the cost of roads is paid for with something other than fuel taxes and vehicle registration, aka user fees. In Wisconsin this means primarily property taxes, which everyone pays directly or indirectly. “Program funding” for motor vehicles is therefore NOT tied to vehicle registration fees, or even registration fees plus fuel taxes. So why should bicycles be held to a different standard? Because motor vehicle user fees pay for 56% of the cost of roads, I suggest we dedicate 56% of the space on roadways to the EXCLUSIVE use of motor vehicles – no bikes or pedestrians allowed on that 56% of the space. The rest of the space, 44% of the roadway, should be divided more or less equally between all road users (yes, including motor vehicles would be fair), since everyone pays for that 44% through property taxes. Until the fact that public roads have to be subsidized (at approximately the same rate as public transit), any talk about bicycles (or pedestrians) not paying their share of the roads is simply ignorance of the facts. Chuck From: Eric Westhagen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:44 PM To: STRAWSER, Charles ; BikiesSubmissions Subject: Re: [Bikies] Bicycle Counts (was Question on bicycle traffic counts) Dear Group, For the past week this debate and list of suggestions about bike counts and direction of spending for bike infrastructure avoids the real question of payments. I have not commented before on your local Madison bike issues and advocacy groups have made Madison into one of the few "biking cities" in the country. Yet there is a constant theme that "auto drivers" don't like bicyclists? And why might that be? Certainly most rode some type of bikes as children. They are pedestrians part of their current lives--so just why? They feel it is "us or they?" Certainly that is the general opinion expressed in this listserv--"us or they"--"us or those big bad SUVs." And all sorts of hockus-pokus can be put forth to show why bikes deserve all the spending they have gotten in the greater Madison area. Nevertheless--the bikes are a minority--an elite, if you will. So, why not have a real money raising license fee? Then bikes can put their heads up high and declare to autos that they are really on equal footing in the payments department. Why not an annual fee with fines for non compliance? There is still no gas tax money--but a comparable annual bike license fee would go along way toward making a case for bike infrastructure. >From the Web at the close of '07 was this:---- "[In Wisconsin, state law prohibits officials from collecting more in bike registration fees than it costs to run the registration program, said Arthur Ross, pedestrian-bike coordinator for the city of Madison. The best-known pay-off of that city's mandatory registration is also enabling police to return stolen bikes, Ross said. "Certainly, I would not want to see program funding tied to bike registration," Ross added. "We need a whole lot more money than were ever going to raise through bicycle registration." In Madison , about 20,000 bikes have valid registrations, said John Rider, bicycle registration coordinator. The $10 registration lasts four years. The program helps transportation planners, "get a handle on how many bicycles we have in the city so we can have some more say in trying to have bicycle facilities," Rider said. "It gives us a voice." It was pressure from cycling advocates that eventually led Minnesota lawmakers to repeal that state's registration program several years ago, said Anderson, the bicycle and pedestrian coordinator. ]" ----------. . . .-------- Eric _______________________________________________ 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 |
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
