UPDATE

Full analysis of the bill from the Alliance for Biking & Walking:

Yesterday, we let you know that federal funding for biking and walking has come under attack in both the House and Senate. Please contact your member of Congress through the League of American Bicyclists' Action Center — and ask your members and supporters to do the same.

In the hours since yesterday's press conference, our partners at America Bikes have analyzed the outline released by John Mica (R-FL), chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.There were very few details and very few surprises in the bill — and some significant challenges for biking and walking.

Highlights overall

• The bill will be a 6-year, $230 billion bill. Mica is bound to House rules to keep the bill at that size. He is passing the buck to the ways and means committee.
• The bill gives states increased flexibility.
• The bill expedites project delivery. Mica claims it cuts the time in half.
• Mica had several other Republican members of the committee on the dais with him, and had each of them express their support. These members were Hanna (NY), LoBiondo (NJ), Duncan (TN), Shuster (PA), Gibbs (OH), Bucshon (Il), and Landry  (LA). Many were there because they chair a T&I subcommittee, but all expressed their support for the bill. This is disheartening, because these are several of the moderate Republican members of the committee.

• Mica is waiting to get floor time before he introduces the bill. He is hoping that will be before August, but, at this time, transportation is not on the House floor schedule.

• There will be no Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School or Recreational Trails in the bill
• Mica kept insisting that bicycle and pedestrian projects would be ‘eligible’ for funding. It's important that we be clear that eligibility is not the same thing as dedicated funding. Given the overall cuts in funding (in particular to STP and CMAQ), the increased flexibility for state DOTs and the likely elimination of TE, bike/ped and SRTS coordinator positions, it will make accessing these funds more difficult in states with good DOTs, and exceeding difficult in states with bad DOTs.
• Mica said there would be no mandate forcing states to spend money on ‘non-highway’ projects.
• Mica specifically called out the Nonmotorized Pilot Project as "not in the national interest" (which I take as code for all bike/ped).
• Bill channels funding to projects in the national and regional interests.

• Mica also stated that the flexibility to spend on such projects will be monitored by performance measures.
• We believe these will include congestion, safety and state of good repair.
• As an example however, the entire discussion on safety revolved around truck and bus safety and teenage drivers.

• When asked if the sub allocation to STP would remain the same, Mica answered “There will be funds appropriated to STP”.  He did not address the sub allocation question.
• We don’t know for sure if that means Mica misunderstood the question or he avoided the question.
• NACTO has been pushing this issue throughout and believe that Mica’s main point of ‘flexibility to states” is in conflict with their interests.

• The overall bill cuts funding by 35%, but those cuts are not even across programs.
• The proportion of funds going to the national highway system, bridges and interstate Maintenance will significantly increase, and that increase will come out of programs like CMAQ and STP.

• We're unclear on the effects to HSIP

• Changes to NHTSA allow states to flex money out of NHTSA depending on safety record (again safety discussion focused on trucks and buses and youth drivers).
• The bill establishes a focus on seat belt use, youth driving and impaired driving.

• Democrats from the T&I committee held a press conference to respond to the Mica bill.
• Rep. Nick Rahall described it as a “Road to Ruin.”
• They called for a 2-year bill at higher funding – much like Sen. Barbara Boxer.
• They are united in rejecting the Mica bill, and rejecting Mica’s claim that the process has been at all bi partisan or transparent.

• Transportation for America: Their response is attached, which includes: “We are particularly concerned at the proposal to eliminate dedicated funding that helps provide more safe options for walking and biking."
• Industry Groups: In general the industry groups are trying hard to support the bill. They praise the expediting of projects but all comment on the hardships such a low funding level means.
• AASHTO and ARBTA (road builders ) are positive
• APTA, Chamber and Labor are critical

Read the League of American Bicyclists' righteous response to House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica's (R-FL) proposed federal transportation bill, which ELIMINATES funding for bike/ped projects (i.e. no more greenways, trails, or bike lanes funded through programs like TE, RTP, and Safe Routes to School).

Contact your Georgia Congressional Representative & Senators NOW to protect bicycle & pedestrian funding!

You can find out the impact these federal programs have had on your Congressional district (and the state overall) here: http://americabikes.org/resources/

The National Association of Realtors just published a "Public Schools Toolkit," which covers school siting, funding for school facilities, and walkability assessment, as seen from a housing perspective:

http://www.realtor.org/government_affairs/smart_growth/toolkit_public_education

The publication also mentions that there are smart growth grants available:

NAR’s Smart Growth Grant

This grant provides seed funding to REALTOR® associations to initiate efforts to engage in local land use issues, including school siting and construction, with other stakeholders and elected officials.

We are very pleased to announce that we have selected the following five deserving  organizations to receive our second round of Seed Grants for Bicycle Advocacy:

Bicycle Improvement & Investment Committee (Georgia Tech)
Bike Emory
Communicycle (Atlanta)
Griffin Bicycle Coalition
Tift Area Greenway Association.

These 2nd round seed grant funds will be used to assist the following programs and activities:

• Outfit a community resource center with bicycle repair tools, work stands, and other equipment

• Pay for bicycle parking racks, “Share the Road” signs, and children’s bicycle helmets for free distribution

• Develop educational materials instructing cyclists on safe, legal bicycling practices and motorists on safe road sharing behaviors

• Start-up organizational costs

Congratulations to our second round seed grant winners!

Our first round grant recipients were Wheel Movement in Augusta, Bike Alpharetta, Bike Decatur, Oconee County Cycling Organization , and Bike Cherokee.

HB 101, the "Better Bicycling Bill," was enacted on July 1, 2011.

Click here for the the full version of the bill to see all of the changes it implements. Major updates & additions from HB 101 include:

• Motor vehicles must provide at least three feet of safe passing distance when overtaking a bicyclist
• Cyclists may move to the center of the lane, i.e. take the lane, when surface obstructions, hazards or debris make traveling to the right unsafe
• Cyclists must travel in the direction of traffic while using a designated bicycle lane*
• Bicyclists have the right of way in a designated bicycle lane
• Designated bicycle lanes must be built according to recognized national design standards

* While the new law only specifies that cyclists in bike lanes must travel in the same direction as traffic, bicycles, as vehicles, must abide by all normal vehicular laws. Wrong way travel in any traffic lane is unlawful and unsafe.

Demonstration of the three feet safe passing distance, courtesy of the Bicycling Club of Milledgeville: