Shortchanges in Md. commitment to pedestrians
The Baltimore Sun has had several articles/letters to the Editor of late describing the lack of spending Federal Aid on bike/ped issues and the States response on how that it is spending more then just Federal Aid to address this problem. So the question is do we have a problem or not? So by way of analogy lets look at the issues this way:Lets describe the problem like having a house with a leaky roof, and there is aid to home owners to do home improvements such as fix a leaky roof. So when the the report came out stating Maryland uses very little aid in home improvements the State of Maryland says now wait a minute we are spending more then just aid money on home improvements. Just one problem with this response, the roof still leaks.
To understand a bit better why the roof still leaks you need to know that the roof in this analogy is maintained by three major divisions, State, Counties and Baltimore City. So what the State says is only about their section of the roof and not about the other sections. And if you look at the home improvements bills on where and how the money is being spent you come up with something rather shocking.
Let's say your bedroom is under a section of the leaky roof that is not maintained by the State, so you ask the state for aid to fix your roof and the state says sorry. the only thing we offer is half priced decks, do you want one? So while a deck can qualify as a home improvement for this aid, fixing leaking roofs is the higher priority by Federal policy and one would think it should be a higher priority for the state as well. To understand how this came about we need to look at the State's policy of getting Federal Aid to go further.
It sounds like wonderful idea getting Federal Aid to go further but let's apply the same principles to another Federal Aid program, food stamps. Only a small percentage of the population benefits from this program, but if we were to change the program from supplying most of the money to buy cheep necessary food to one where we would require a 50% match for high priced items, let's say something like an expensive steak, more people would benefit and the quality of life for more people would be improved. You cannot argue that the money is not going further but is Federal Aid supposed to be like an extravagant Christmas present or is it to address a need?
So the question comes down to what is better, mostly funding a lot of cheap improvements or limited funding to a few expensive improvements? Or it might be better to look at the qualifiers for each principle in order to control the budget. Under the State's current system they essentially set a high project cost and if the locality is willing to spend half that cost as the main qualifiers. The other system looks at the most needy and what is necessary to fix that need. So what should we stress the extravagant or what is necessary to fix a problem?
So while the State is funding a diverse range of bicycle and pedestrian projects under its section of the roof but in administering Federal aid to the other localities it has only funded one type of bicycle and pedestrian project. Nothing against that one type of project but one really has to ask if other types of projects are good enough to be funded through specialty funds for State roads why not on the other roads as well? Which comes back to the point, being 49 out of 50 in spending Federal Aid and being the 6th worst with the pedestrian fatality rate is a major problem on more then just State roads. And the State despite making good effort on its roads is making it extremely difficult for everyone else by not following Federal policy in administering Federal funds. We need everyone to demand more diverse bike/ped projects on more diverse types of roads. We need to demand to focus on areas of need and not just on look how much money we spent (and still did not fix the leaky roof.) .
Study: Maryland ranks 49th in spending to keep walkers, bicyclists safe <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/commuting/bal-pedestrian1109,0,5992815.story">http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/commuting/bal-pedestrian1109,0,5992815.story</a>;
Neil J. Pedersen, administrator of the Maryland State Highway Administration response:
Study shortchanges Md. commitment to pedestrians <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-pedestrianletter1111,0,4642028.story">http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-pedestrianletter1111,0,4642028.story</a>;:
Support for my "roof still leaks" argument:
We must link health, safety, transportation policies <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-pedestrianletter1117,0,5035250.story">http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-pedestrianletter1117,0,5035250.story</a>;
What's Related