DeWine proposes 18-cent/gallon gas tax increase; to be adjusted for inflation (pros and cons, safety)

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by ferraris

And bike infrastructure in particular is incredibly cheap compared to roads. I don't think anyone is arguing for Ohio to fully switch from cars to bikes, but just to reasonably support more than one method of transportation.

To put this another way. Of the $3.4B ODOT budget, only $20M is allocated for bikes.(source)

Half of one percent of the budget is for bikes. That's a pittance, and clearly shows that the gas tax funds are not being raided to fund bike paths.

Bike commuting may not be for everyone, but it's certainly for more than a half a percent of us.

[WRnative]

Gov. DeWine requested $2.75 billion in safety improvement funding over 11 years. House Republicans slashed that amount to $89 million.

https://www.cleveland.com/opinion/20...as-suddes.html

You get what you pay for.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Annie53

Ohioans who don't drive still benefit from our roads, all Ohioans benefit from our roads, only a select few would benefit from bike infrastructure.

Only some people benefit from parks. Not everyone uses them. Only some people ever have a house fire, so not everyone uses the fire department. Only some people will be victims of crime, so not everyone uses the police department. Only some people walk, so not everyone uses sidewalks. Why invest in those things at all then if we follow your logic?


All types of infrastructure and city-provided services are for public benefit, whether you personally use them or not. Other people do. Try thinking beyond yourself for a change.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Only some people benefit from parks. Not everyone uses them. Only some people ever have a house fire, so not everyone uses the fire department. Only some people will be victims of crime, so not everyone uses the police department. Only some people walk, so not everyone uses sidewalks. Why invest in those things at all then if we follow your logic?


All types of infrastructure and city-provided services are for public benefit, whether you personally use them or not. Other people do. Try thinking beyond yourself for a change.

Why don't you try to think about others instead of yourself for a change?

https://patch.com/ohio/cleveland/ohi...bridges-report

The state of Ohio has more to worry about than bike infrastructure and the select few that would benefit.

It's all about getting the biggest bang for the buck.

I suggest you contact our state legislators if you think your arguments have any merit when compared to the big, statewide, picture.

Good luck with that.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Annie53

Why don't you try to think about others instead of yourself for a change?

https://patch.com/ohio/cleveland/ohi...bridges-report

The state of Ohio has more to worry about than bike infrastructure and the select few that would benefit.

It's all about getting the biggest bang for the buck.

I suggest you contact our state legislators if you think your arguments have any merit when compared to the big, statewide, picture.

Good luck with that.

I am thinking about everyone. I am not advocating eliminating roads entirely. I am not advocating that people be forced to use transit. I am simply saying budgets only being reserved for roads has not worked. It has just about bankrupted ODOT, so I would argue that roads are NOT the biggest bang for the buck. There are too many roads with too little money coming in to maintain them, let alone build even more. Getting more people off the roads would actually save on maintenance and decrease traffic for those who drive. Meanwhile, those who walk or bike more would be healthier, thereby potentially reducing medical costs throughout the system. And overall, there would be choices for everyone, not just some. Bike lanes, sidewalks and multi-use paths all raise property values in neighborhoods and improve quality of life. Reduced auto traffic lowers pollution levels. How is none of that a good thing?

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

I am thinking about everyone. I am not advocating eliminating roads entirely. I am not advocating that people be forced to use transit. I am simply saying budgets only being reserved for roads has not worked. It has just about bankrupted ODOT, so I would argue that roads are NOT the biggest bang for the buck. There are too many roads with too little money coming in to maintain them, let alone build even more. Getting more people off the roads would actually save on maintenance and decrease traffic for those who drive. Meanwhile, those who walk or bike more would be healthier, thereby potentially reducing medical costs throughout the system. And overall, there would be choices for everyone, not just some. Bike lanes, sidewalks and multi-use paths all raise property values in neighborhoods and improve quality of life. Reduced auto traffic lowers pollution levels. How is none of that a good thing?

The thing is, in a state like Ohio, with very few who would actually take advantage of bike infrastructure, any positive impact would be far too small to be worth the money.

Actually, I always liked riding bikes, in fact, there is a bike trail near me.

I would love to use it but it just isn't safe, especially for women, unless you are in a group.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by Annie53

The thing is, in a state like Ohio, with very few who would actually take advantage of bike infrastructure, any positive impact would be far too small to be worth the money.

Actually, I always liked riding bikes, in fact, there is a bike trail near me.

I would love to use it but it just isn't safe, especially for women, unless you are in a group.

Have you actually polled the population of Ohio to see how many people would actually find a better bike infrastructure a positive, or are you basing your statements on your opinion?

Have you considered the thought that an improved network of bike friendly pathways, roadways,trails, etc. would likely increase the safety of those networks?

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

Have you actually polled the population of Ohio to see how many people would actually find a better bike infrastructure a positive, or are you basing your statements on your opinion?

Have you considered the thought that an improved network of bike friendly pathways, roadways,trails, etc. would likely increase the safety of those networks?

I am sure Ohio's money crunchers have weighed the pros and cons.

They are the ones you have to convince not me.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Annie53

very few who would actually take advantage of bike infrastructure.

Fewer than half a percent?

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Annie53

The thing is, in a state like Ohio, with very few who would actually take advantage of bike infrastructure, any positive impact would be far too small to be worth the money.

Actually, I always liked riding bikes, in fact, there is a bike trail near me.

I would love to use it but it just isn't safe, especially for women, unless you are in a group.

I still haven’t seen any studies or surveys of Ohioans saying they wouldn’t take advantage of bike infrastructure if it existed. Perhaps you have those studies? Or are you just giving your view because you won’t?

Bike paths are inherently dangerous for women?