Funding for Bike Paths under attack

[OneEighth]

It will become more of a State/local issue if this goes into effect.
I’ll let y’all handicap how that’ll play out politically.

[Terpfan]

Well sometimes I think the money spent on C&O is wasted as it seems to wash away every three years or so. The trick to the advocacy is showing how it’s actually reducing costs to the system as a whole otherwise you run into the classic farebox recovery dilemma–aka that 40-60% of most rail trips are subsidized by vehicle gas taxes and more rail riders equals less revenue to pay for more costs. It sounds like the fund is in DOT, but someone should try getting it moved to NPS or maybe even HUD with a dedicated revenue source.

[JimF22003]

I’m as selfish as the next person. When I read that article my first thoughts were — bike paths OK; flowers and museums Not OK.

I’m sure most of the drivers on the road feel “Bike Paths Not OK”….

[OneEighth]

Showing a broader economic benefit—promoting tourism with its attendant restaurant and retail impact, for example—is an appropriate way to frame any discussion about how best to use public funds. Trick is to have the sectors who are benefitting do some of the lifting, too.
Othewise, this quickly becomes a shouting match between drivers and everyone else and they’ve got the numbers.

[MCL1981]

The C&O canal tow path is not transportation infrastructure. It is a recreational park and part of the NPS. I don’t know why it would ever be getting transportation funds. If it is damaged, the NPS should be figuring out how to fix it with their funding.

[Author]

Posts