BFBC Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition  
Home | About Us | Events | Issues | Maillist | Newsletter | Positions | Resources | Safety | Subcom | Volunteer  

City Bicycle Fund, 2003

last updated 2007-03-27

Overview

For the past several years, the City Council has allocated $170,000 of the General Fund for implementation of the Bicycle Plan. In a surprise move, City Council voted at their June 24 meeting to redirect up to $140,000 of the $170,000 allocation to be used instead for traffic calming -- most likely, for expensive traffic circles which would benefit only a few neighborhoods.

BFBC worked tirelessly to undo this damage. The situation evolved continually, with many twists and turns. The continued support of bicyclists is essential to the campaign. We plan to keep this web page up-to-date, especially when action is necessary.

However, on October 14, by a 5-3 vote, Council voted to confirm the diversion of the funds. Read on.

Please see the action alert on our traffic circles action page (last updated 2007-03-27).

Details and Background

The remainder of this web page contains articles, letters, and other items pertaining to the City Bicyle Fund issue. They are ordered most recent first. You can jump directly to any item by clicking on it, or you can browse by scrolling down the page.

Related Information

Return to the top-level BFBC issues page.


From the BFBC Newsletter, November-December 2003, pages 1-2

Editorial: A Call to Action

Hank Resnik, BFBC Co-Chair, and Dave Campbell, BFBC President
Guess what. No one ever promised us a rose garden -- or even a bike lane. The car culture is alive and well, and Berkeley finances are toughter than ever. The road ahead is long.

To some extent, we bicyclists in Berkeley have been spoiled by our own success. In the early years of BFBC, we pressured the City to complete the Bike Plan, we worked hard to get the I-80 overcrossing built, and we attended endless meetings to design the network of bike boulevards still in early stages of completion.

Word got around that local bicyclists are passionately dedicated to their chosen mode of transportation and that we have tremendous energy and determination. We were a power to be reckoned with.

Then came the backlash. It was subtle, of course. In a green city like Berkeley, openly criticizing something as environmentally friendly as bicycling just won't do. Instead we started hearing statements like, "We can't all ride a bike." Of course we can't all ride a bike. That was never our goal. From its inception BFBC has been interested primarily in getting more people to bicycle on a regular basis by making the City's streets safer. Just increasing the number of bicyclists by a few percent would be a triumph.

Councilmember Miriam Hawley says the recently completed raid on the City's bike fund is for one time only. We're skeptical about that. What's particularly galling about Hawley's budgetary sleight-of-hand is that it centered on neighbors' demands for extremely expensive landscaped traffic circles to calm traffic, when far less costly circles could do just as good a job. We recently surveyed the cost of traffic circles across the U.S. Seattle, a leader in building traffic circles, spent $8,000-10,000 on each circle in 2002--nowhere near the $25,000 Berkeley planners want to spend.

Starting now, BFBC is initiating a new campaign for wiser and more careful spending of our City's tax dollars, with a specific focus on pressuring the City to build more cost-effective traffic circles that will be acceptable to all neighborhoods. Check out our web site (www.bfbc.org) for regular updates and sample letters to write. And remember: we need your energy and commitment more than ever before.

From the BFBC Newsletter, November-December 2003, page 1

Cyclists Defeated as Hawley Succeeds in Transferring $140,000 from Bike Fund

by Dave Campbell
On Tuesday, October 14, the Berkeley City Council narrowly passed a resolution supporting Councilmember Miriam Hawley's proposal to transfer $140,000 from the bike fund to the traffic calming fund to pay for more traffic circles. Councilmember Kriss Worthington's compromise resolution, restricting the $140,000 to traffic circles on bike boulevards, fell one vote short of passing.

As reported in past issues of this newsletter, at the June 24 council meeting Hawley introduced a last-minute budget resolution that transferred $140,000 from the bike fund for traffic calming citywide. After the meeting, several councilmembers, supported by BFBC, expressed concern about this last-minute, unannounced change. Then, at the July 15 meeting, immediately prior to the council's summer recess, the council considered a proposal by Worthington to delay the transfer until the fall so the Transportation Commission and staff could review the issue in more detail. The item was tabled due to the late hour and placed on the agenda of the council's first meeting after its recess in September. At that meeting the Worthington resolution passed with an October 21 deadline to reconsider the issue.

Because of council agenda conflicts, the item was moved up to the October 14 meeting. Prior to that meeting, BFBC representatives made repeated calls to councilmembers to support the Worthington resolution and press for a compromise. Several members of BFBC spoke in support of the Worthington resolution during the October 14 public comment period. Last-minute vote switching, however, led to its defeat and the passage of the Hawley resolution.

Now, with $140,000 being transferred out of bicycle improvements and $30,000 going to salaries and administration, no money will remain in the bike fund for the current year. The bike fund was the only part of the city budget that had money transferred for another use.

Hawley stated at the council meeting that while this would be a "one-time" transfer, it is needed because there was an imbalance in transportation funding in favor of bicycle and pedestrian projects. Councilmembers Linda Maio and Dona Spring countered that overall transportation spending in Berkeley, which includes $3 million per year in street maintenance and repair, leaves bicycle and pedestrian projects without enough money.

The fight over funding for traffic circles stems in part from the high-cost traffic circle designs the City is considering. Fully landscaped traffic circles cost approximately $25,000. A prototype lower-cost circle that can be installed for about $8,500 is located at the intersection of Page St. and Santa Fe and Cornell Aves. in West Berkeley. Several councilmembers have told BFBC representatives that they are not hearing adequate support from neighbors for the lower-cost circles.

From the BFBC On-Line Bulletin, 20 October 2003

City Council Shifts $140,000 from Bike Fund to Traffic Calming Fund

On Tuesday, Oct. 14, the City Council passed a resolution supporting Councilmember Miriam Hawley's proposal to transfer $140,000 from the Bike Fund to the Traffic Calming Fund in order to pay for more traffic circles. This was a setback for bicycling in Berkeley and for BFBC, which has opposed the transfer since Councilmember Hawley first introduced it last June.

Councilmember Kriss Worthington's compromise motion to use the $140,000 only for traffic circles on bike boulevards was defeated. The vote was: Worthington, Maio, Bates and Spring for Worthington's motion; Hawley, Wozniak, Breland, Shirek against Worthington's motion.

When Worthington's motion was defeated, the council then voted to support Hawley's proposal. The vote was: Hawley, Wozniak, Bates, Breland, Shirek for the proposal; Worthington, Maio, and Spring against the proposal.

Many of us in BFBC are meeting with councilmembers and bicycling advocates to determine appropriate next steps. We will announce further developments in forthcoming bulletins and our November/December printed newsletter.

From the BFBC On-Line Bulletin, 12 October 2003

City Council to Decide Fate of $140,000 Bike Fund, Tue Oct 14

This Tuesday, Oct. 14, the City Council will decide on the fate of Councilmember Miriam Hawley's proposal to transfer $140,000 from the Bike Fund to the Traffic Calming Fund in order to pay for more traffic circles. Councilmember Kriss Worthington has offered a compromise resolution that would restrict the $140,000 to traffic circles on bike boulevards, which would preserve the funds for bicycle projects and expedite construction of some traffic circles on boulevards. (The item has been changed from its originally scheduled date of Oct. 21.)

Assistant City Manager for Transportation Peter Hillier has supported Councilmember Hawley's proposal that the transfer to the Traffic Calming Fund be unrestricted. Hillier points out that the transfer would provide $330,000 for traffic calming and leave $360,000 for bike plan implementation and would give him more flexibility to plan traffic circles. At a meeting last week with BFBC President Dave Campbell and Co-chair Hank Resnik, Hillier said he plans to do a more comprehensive transportation plan for Berkeley by January 2004. Such a plan would provide the necessary perspective to make decisions about priorities and budgeting of needed projects. Hillier also said his department is continuing to look at modified traffic circle designs that are less expensive than the costly $25,000 "permanent" landscaped circles (contrasted with $8,500 for "semi-permanent" circles).

Campbell and Resnik also discussed this issue with Councilmember Worthington and Transportation Commissioners, all of whom support Worthington's compromise resolution. Worthington feels that the compromise is the best way to preserve the most money for bicycle projects while at the same time addressing demands for traffic calming from residents.

BFBC's strategy is to support Worthington's resolution while seeking to build support for lower-cost traffic circle designs acceptable to neighborhood residents. This would provide more traffic circles, and thus increased traffic safety, to more neighborhoods.

From the BFBC On-Line Bulletin, 26 September 2003

BFBC Works to Stop Raid on the City's Bike Fund

As noted in previous bulletins and our last two newsletters, on June 24 Councilmember Miriam Hawley introduced and succeeded in passing a last-minute budget resolution that transferred $140,000 from the City's bike fund to be spent on landscaped traffic circles citywide, whether on bike routes or not. Discussion and debate about this move continued throughout the summer while the City Council was on recess.

When the Council resumed meeting on Sept. 9, Councilmember Kriss Worthington introduced a compromise resolution to use the $140,000 for traffic circles on bicycle boulevards only. At its Sept. 18 meeting the Transportation Commission supported the Worthington resolution. The commission also reaffirmed its earlier position favoring semi-permanent traffic circles over higher-cost landscaped traffic circles ($8,000 each vs. $25,000 each). Although some neighborhoods are demanding the higher-cost landscaped circles, with a limited transportation budget, the City can't afford to install them in all neighborhoods needing traffic calming.

The BFBC board has consistently upheld the desirability of the lower-cost circles in order to calm traffic in as many neighborhoods as possible for a given budget. But many homeowners in Berkeley don't like them. There's even a subtle kind of class warfare in progress (yes, even in Berkeley!). The Elmwood and Leconte neighborhoods have expensive circles and demand more of them (some have said they want expensive circles-or no circles). Residents elsewhere, e.g., West Berkeley, tell their councilmembers they want the same treatment as the Elmwood and Leconte neighborhoods.

How to resolve this dilemma? At its Sept. 24 meeting the BFBC board voted to support an in-depth study of the City's transportation and traffic calming needs, including the related costs and available funds. A serious look at overall city-wide transportation planning, including the costs of city-wide traffic calming, is the best way to determine what the City can actually accomplish-and how much it can afford to spend per neighborhood and per intersection.

Many thanks to all of you who sent letters, e-mails, and other messages to the City Council earlier in the summer protesting the $140,000 transfer of funds. Those letters and messages made an important difference.

Currently BFBC leaders are communicating with councilmembers and staff to negotiate an agreement on how to proceed. We'll keep you informed on a regular basis, and we hope very soon to be able to recommend a direct course of action involving a new round of letters and messages.

To stay current on this urgent matter, please become a member of BFBC if you aren't a member already. Also, please check out our web site for regular updates: www.BFBC.org. Or call our office at 510-549-RIDE.

From this web page, 12 September 2003

Council Refers Bike Fund Question to Staff and TC

Thanks for all your letters and support. At its meeting on Sep 9, City Council passed Councilmember Worthington's recommendation on item #37. This puts the bicycle fund diversion on hold while the city staff and Transportation Commission write their own detailed recommendations on the matter. BFBC members will need to remain involved during the public comment part of this process.

The text of Councilmember Worthington's recommendation is posted here. It superceded the Worthington and Maio resolutions which were placed before Council on July 15 as described in the Sep-Oct newsletter. The matter will return to Council later in the fall.

BFBC On-Line Action Alert (sent to bfbc-news), 7 September 2003

ACTION ALERT:
UPCOMING VOTE ON CITY BIKE FUND
PLEASE CALL OR SEND A MESSAGE IMMEDIATELY

The big story of the summer has been the proposed use of $140,000 from the City's bicycle fund for landscaped traffic circles that would not necessarily be on bike routes or bike boulevards. Councilmember Miriam Hawley made the proposal at the last minute at the June 24 council meeting, and it became part of the City's adopted budget for 2003-04.

After that meeting, many people objected to this transfer of funds without any public discussion. At the Council's July 15 meeting Councilmember Kriss Worthington introduced a resolution to roll back the decision, but the resolution never reached a vote and was tabled. Then the Council went on summer recess for six weeks.

In the past week (after the Sept.-Oct. issue of the BFBC newsletter covering this story was written) Councilmember Worthington introduced a new resolution that will be voted on at the Council's first meeting after its summer recess, Tues., Sept. 9. The BFBC board of directors took an emergency poll yesterday on the resolution and voted to support it. Now we need to show our support for the resolution through letters, e-mails, and phone calls.

PLEASE ACT NOW. Copy the sample letter below into a message, personalize it if you have time (e.g., by adding a sentence or two of your own), and send it to: clerk (at) ci.berkeley.ca (dot) us

You can also call or fax the city clerk to express your views: tel 510-981-6900, fax 510-981-6901.

Background on Councilmember Worthington's resolution: The resolution is in a PDF file and you can read it at http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/citycouncil/2003citycouncil/packet/090903/2003-09-09%20Item%2037.pdf.

In the Council agenda the item is summarized as follows: "Freeze spending from the $140,000 bicycle boulevard funding proposed to be shifted to traffic circle funding, and delay Council vote on Worthington compromise item [from the July 15 meeting] to the City Council meeting of October 21, 2003, to give City Manager time to write a report and to give Transportation Commission time to come [up] with their recommendations."

Wording of the BFBC board resolution voted on 6 Sep (the vote was 5-0, with three board members not voting because they could not be reached in time) [update, 8 Sep: all remaining board members replied; the vote is 8-0, unanimous]. "Approve Councilmember Kriss Worthington's resolution on the Sept. 9, 2003, City Council agenda, #37; encourage Councilmember Worthington to add language that will enable the process to be completed with adequate time, which may mean going beyond the October 21 deadline in the current version of the resolution; and encourage passage of the resolution on the consent calendar."

SAMPLE LETTER TO COUNCIL

To: Mayor Tom Bates and Members of the City Council

Re: SUPPORT item #37 (Sept 9, 2003), Bicycle Boulevards/Traffic Circle Funding

Dear Mayor Bates and Members of the City Council:

I am writing to support Councilmember Kriss Worthington's resolution, item #37 on the Sept. 9 Council agenda, which calls for a freeze on the transfer of $140,000 from the bicycle improvements fund in order to provide for adequate review by the City Manager and the Transportation Commission. I urge you to adopt this resolution as part of the consent calendar and to include language that will allow sufficient time for the City Manager and the Transportation Commission to develop well-informed recommendations, taking public input into account.

Please note that the board of directors of the Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition (BFBC) voted to support item #37 during an emergency session on Saturday, Sept. 6, 2003.

Thank you for your consideration.

From the BFBC Newsletter, September-October 2003, page 1

Spring Budget Raid on the City's Bike Fund:
Saga Likely to Continue into the Fall

by Hank Resnik
In our July-August issue we reported on one of the most important recent developments affecting bicycling in Berkeley: a last-minute decision by the City Council at its June 24 meeting to use funds from the $170,000-per-year bicycle account to pay for landscaped traffic circles. The budget amendment, introduced by Councilmember Miriam Hawley and voted on unanimously by the council, did not require that the circles be on bicycle boulevards or even related to bicycling.

On July 15, at the last Council meeting before a six-week summer break, Councilmember Kriss Worthington introduced a resolution to ensure that the money for landscaped traffic circles would be spent on bike boulevards only. Prior to the meeting Councilmember Linda Maio introduced an amended resolution requiring that the matter be submitted to the Transportation Commission for a full public discussion. But the Council ran out of time, and both resolutions were tabled. The next important step will be taken Tuesday, Sept. 9, at the first City Council meeting after the summer recess. This is when the Worthington and Maio resolutions will finally come up for a vote.

At its August 26 meeting the BFBC board of directors voted unanimously to support the Maio resolution. If that resolution passes, the entire matter will be discussed publicly in a series of meetings likely to continue through the fall.

"This will require vigilance and involvement on the part of the bicycling community," says BFBC co-chair Mark Abrahams. "Even if Maio's resolution passes, the follow-up meetings will have huge implications for how quickly long-promised bicycle boulevard improvements will be made and how well the City addresses other long-standing traffic calming issues."

What You Can Do
Your input and involvement are needed now. You can send a letter or e-mail (see page 7 [of the Newsletter] for addresses), or you can plan to attend the Sept. 9 Council meeting and speak during the public comment period. For more information, call the BFBC office at 510.549.RIDE (7433) or go to our web site: www.bfbc.org.

Transportation Commission Action, 21 August 2003

On 21 August 2003, the Transportation Commission took the following action. Needless to say, BFBC commends the T.C. for its recommendation.

The Transportation Commission recommends that Council refer the recent redirection of bicycle fund monies to traffic calming to the Transportation Commission for review. The Transportation Commission requests that the City Council not approve an expenditure of the recently shifted $140,000 until the Transportation Commission has submitted input to Council. In addition, the Transportation Commission requests that Council schedule a special Council briefing, by staff and a Commission representative, on the City's traffic calming challenge after the Transportation Commission has developed a response on budgetary shifts. Finally, the commission endorses recent efforts by forward-thinking Councilmembers to address community concerns over the last-minute, unnoticed changes made to transportation funding during the budget process. We encourage Council to amend present motions regarding this item as necessary to ensure Councilmembers are not unnecessarily disqualified from voting on this item.

Motion by: Syed. Seconded by: Landau. Ayes: Alfsen, Abrahams (standing in for Campbell), Greenhut, Haselsteiner, Landau, Lydon, Metzger, Syed. Noes: None. Abstentions: None.

BFBC letter to Mayor re NBG event and Bike Boulevard Funding, 8 August 2003

The Santa Cruz-based National Bicycle Greenway group convinced Mayor Bates to read a mayoral proclamation in their honor on August 8, and to bicycle a short distance with them on the Bike Boulevards. BFBC found this most interesting, given Council's 7-1-1 vote on June 24 (with Bates and Worthington both in the majority) to divert money away from the Bike Boulevards.

Phil Morton attended the event as the official BFBC representative, and he read the following letter from BFBC. The letter was also delivered to Mayor Bates and Councilmember Worthington in writing.

Unfortunately, Mayor Bates recused himself from discussion of this item at the July 15 Council meeting -- he was advised to do so by the Fair Political Practices Commission because he lives near the site of a potential traffic circle. However, Bike Boulevard implementation is a citywide concern and we are looking to the Mayor's office to show leadership on treating it as such and engaging in this matter when the item returns to Council. (A bit of public pressure to do so wouldn't hurt.)

To: Mayor Tom Bates and Councilmember Kriss Worthington
Subject: Today's National Bike Greenway + Mayor's event
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003

Dear Mayor Bates and Councilmember Worthington:

We are writing to you on behalf of BFBC, the Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition.

We are pleased and gratified that you are taking time to recognize and ride with the bicyclists from the National Bicycle Greenway group.

BFBC is heartened that you recognize the importance of bicycling as a method of transportation. This is a perfect time to remind everybody that bicycling, as a transportation mode, is a Good Thing:

• It's good for the city: the more people who bike instead of driving, the quieter, the more pleasant, and the safer are our streets.

• It's good for the environment: less resources used, less waste produced, and less toxins released into air, water, and earth.

• It's good for public health -- most people find that biking makes them healthier.

• It's good for drivers: less competition for precious parking spaces!

• Finally, it's good for world peace. This is no joke. "No war for oil" can come to pass only when we are less thirsty for oil.

As you know, Berkeley's own "Bicycle Greenways" are our long-planned Bicycle Boulevards, plus our major bike trails. But it's the Bike Boulevards that matter most in Berkeley, because they take people where they need to go for daily work and errands.

For all these reasons we are counting on you to help restore the $140,000 (out of $170,000) that City Council took from the bicycle plan implementation account on June 24. That was a most unfortunate action and we are baffled that it passed (as part of a larger package) on a 7-1-1 vote. We strongly endorse the item Councilmember Maio introduced at Council on July 15 to remedy that action and see that these funds are directed toward necessary Bicycle Boulevard improvements. We understand that you are working with her on this, and we urge you to do your best to see that Linda Maio's item passes at the next Council meeting.

Again, thanks for your support today of bicycling as a transportation mode, and we are counting on you at the Council meeting.

Sincerely,
Mark Abrahams and Hank Resnik
BFBC Co-Chairs

From the BFBC On-Line Bulletin, 20 July 2003

City Bike Fund Issue --
City Council Defers Decision; Will Resume on Sep 9

At its July 15 meeting the City Council tabled a motion by Councilmember Kriss Worthington that would have resolved questions about possible inappropriate uses of the City's bicycle fund. The Council took up the item, a subject of great concern to BFBC's board of directors and members, late in the evening. It was the Council's last meeting before a six-week summer recess. After a brief discussion, the motion was held over until the Council's next meeting, to be held Sept. 9.

The city's official record of the action is posted at: http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/citycouncil/2003citycouncil/packet/071503/07-15s.htm (scroll down to item #59).

In the week before the July 15 meeting numerous members of BFBC wrote letters and made phone calls to the council expressing their concerns about proposed uses of the bicycle fund to pay for landscaping traffic circles. Councilmember Miriam Hawley introduced the proposal at the last minute during the Council's June 24 meeting. That was when the Council passed the 2003-04 City budget, and Hawley's proposal was made without any public input. Worthington's motion would have changed the proposal to use the money exclusively for circles on bicycle boulevards. BFBC's position was that the funds should not be used for landscaping at all but for more pressing bike-related improvements.

"BFBC members rallied impressively with letters and phone calls to the City Council," said BFBC board co-chair Mark Abrahams. "Councilmembers told us repeatedly how important it was to make a strong showing on this issue, and we did. We'll be back again in force in September."

Thanks to all of you who wrote to council about this!! Eighteen letters were sent to council on this subject, according to the city clerk's official summary. (Same URL as given above -- scroll down to "Communications", near the bottom). We KNOW they made a difference.

Anyone interested in assisting with organizing around this issue, please contact BFBC Board co-chair Hank Resnik at hankr@earthlink.net. And, thanks to Hank for working on this so hard from across the ocean.

BFBC letter to City Council re Traffic Circle Funding and Bike Fund Diversion, 14 July 2003

[BFBC letterhead]
14 July 2003
Mayor Tom Bates and Members of the City Council
City of Berkeley
2180 Milvia St.
Berkeley, CA 94704

Re: Traffic Circle Funding, Item #59 on Council Agenda for July 15, 2003

Dear Mayor Bates and Councilmembers:

The board of directors of the Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition (BFBC) is very concerned about the June 24 decision to use funds from the $170,000-per-year bicycle improvements account for landscaped traffic circles. BFBC favors the following changes:

Thank you for your consideration and for your continued support of bicycling as a valid means of everyday transportation in Berkeley that benefits not only bicyclists but also the community as a whole via reduced pollution, congestion, and resource consumption and increased public health.

Sincerely,

Mark Abrahams
Hank Resnik
Co-Chairs, Board of Directors
Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition

BFBC On-Line Action Alert (sent to bfbc-news), 12 July 2003

SPECIAL BULLETIN: UPDATE ON CITY BIKE FUNDS ACCOUNT
-- IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED --

Fellow Cyclists:

In late June we sent you a bulletin similar to the lead article in our July-August newsletter, the Bicycle-Friendly Times (also available on-line at http://www.bfbc.org/newsletter). The subject was one of the most important recent developments affecting bicycling in Berkeley: a last-minute decision by the City Council at its June 24 meeting to use $140,000 from the $170,000-per-year bicycle account to pay for landscaped traffic circles. There was no requirement in the budget amendment, introduced by Councilmember Miriam Hawley and voted on unanimously by the council, that the circles be on bicycle boulevards or even related to bicycling.

Soon after the June 24 council meeting, Councilmember Kriss Worthington introduced a resolution, now on the July 15 City Council agenda, to ensure that the money for landscaped traffic circles would be spent only on bike boulevards. It is our understanding that the resolution is likely to be amended to enable further input from cyclists and the Transportation Commission, since the last-minute budget decision was made without public input or comment.

YOUR IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED
Please send an e-mail message or fax, or hand-deliver a letter, to the Mayor and City Council no later than Tuesday morning, July 15. Show your support for a fair and open public process to ensure appropriate uses of the bike fund. A model letter, address, and fax number appear at the end of this message.

FURTHER DETAILS...
Although the use of the bike funds was a last-minute budget change, proposals to spend significant amounts of money on landscaping for traffic circles had been circulating for weeks beforehand. Aware of this, BFBC's board of directors voted unanimously in June to oppose such a use of the City's extremely limited funds for transportation improvements. We favor traffic circles as a traffic-calming device. But they can cost as little as $8,000 for the kind of "basic" circle you can see at the intersection of Santa Fe Ave. and Page and Cornell Sts. in Northwest Berkeley. In contrast, the more elaborate landscaped circles can cost $24,000 or more.

Several councilmembers have told us that neighbors invariably prefer the more expensive landscaped circles. These councilmembers are saying, in effect, that they cannot "sell" the simpler, less expensive circles to their constituents. We have no doubt they believe this is the case. Nevertheless, there has never been an open public discussion of the matter--and the serious implications of spending three times as much on each circle, which will severely limit the city's ability to enact the traffic calming plan proposed by Assistant City Manager Peter Hillier, and which will result in the serious inequity of forcing two out of every three locations that could have received circles to go without, in order that the third location receive a luxury-class circle.

BFBC'S LEADERSHIP ROLE ON BEHALF OF BICYCLISTS
Several BFBC leaders took immediate action when we learned of what we believed to be an inappropriate use of the bike fund. BFBC President Dave Campbell, who is on vacation in Mexico but remains in frequent communication through e-mail, sent a strong letter to the city council protesting the action and asking that it be reconsidered. Co-chairs Mark Abrahams and Hank Resnik communicated regularly with councilmembers and members of the Transportation Commission to effect a reasonable compromise that would benefit bicyclists and the community as a whole.

Now it's your turn! Please stop everything to take a few minutes to send an e-mail or letter to the Mayor and City Council. They need to know that we consider this matter urgent and serious. They need to know, as we have shown them on many occasions in the past, that bicyclists care deeply about the need to recognize bicycling as a valid means of everyday transportation and the need to fully implement the city's adopted Bicycle Plan as promised years ago by Council. Your letter or e-mail will make a difference -- Council cares about public input and (for Berkeley Councilmembers anyway) e-mail is just as good as fax or paper mail.

Hank Resnik, BFBC Co-Chair
Mark Abrahams, BFBC Co-Chair

MODEL LETTER AND ADDRESSES
 Please feel free to adapt and personalize the following letter.

To: Mayor Tom Bates and Members of the City Council:

Re: Traffic Circle Funding, Item #59 on Council Agenda for July 15, 2003

I am writing to express my support for the Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition (BFBC) position on the June 24 decision to use funds from the $170,000-per-year bicycle improvements account for landscaped traffic circles. BFBC favors the following changes:

--Ensure that if money from the bicycle fund is used for traffic circles or other traffic calming, it be used for such only on bicycle boulevards.

--Reassess the use of bicycle funds for landscaping, i.e., the triply-expensive traffic circles that require significant additional costs when compared with "basic" circles that can have the same effects on traffic calming ($8,000 for basic circles compared with $24,000 for landscaped circles).

--Ensure that the Transportation Commission has an opportunity to review the decision and recommend specific actions in order to ensure public input into this important decision, which was made at the last minute on June 24 without public input.

Thank you for your consideration and for your continued support of bicycling as a valid means of everyday transportation in Berkeley that benefits not only bicyclists but also the community as a whole via reduced pollution, congestion, and resource consumption and increased public health.

[Your name and contact information here]

Send to:
  E-mail:
      City Clerk: clerk@ci.berkeley.ca.us
      [Important: please include a cover note requesting the clerk to
      distribute the message to the mayor and all councilmembers]
  Cc:
      Assistant City Manager for Transportation Peter Hillier: phillier@ci.berkeley.ca.us
      BFBC Board: board@bfbc.org
  Or fax to:
      City Clerk: (510)981-6901
      [with a cover note, same as for e-mail]

From the BFBC On-Line Bulletin, 30 June 2003

City Council Votes to Redirect $140K from Bike Fund to Traffic Circles

For the past several years, the City Council has allocated $170,000 of the General Fund for implementation of the Bicycle Plan. In a surprise move, City Council voted at their June 24 meeting to redirect up to $140,000 of the $170,000 allocation to be used instead "for traffic calming, including traffic circles." The official record is at: http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/citycouncil/2003citycouncil/packet/062403/06-24s.htm item 26, final paragraph, subhead number 6).

It's not stated in the official record, but much of the redirected funds would likely go to landscaping, which would triple the costs of a basic traffic circle with planters.

Much more on this story is in the Jul-Aug BFBC Newsletter. It's the lead story, on page 1. The newsletter has been printed and is somewhere in the process of being mailed. However, you can get it online now by going to http://www.bfbc.org/newsletter/ and clicking on Jul-Aug 2003.

BFBC is still sorting out what this means and how to respond. The matter will almost surely be discussed at this Wednesday's Bicycle Subcommittee meeting. This item not on the meeting agenda -- it arose after the agenda was set -- so it can be discussed but no action can be taken.

From the BFBC Newsletter, July-August 2003, page 1

A Lot of Talk, Some Action on Traffic Circles

by Hank Resnik
In recent weeks traffic circles have been the focus of many discussions among Berkeleyans who are concerned about ways to slow down speeders and make neighborhood streets more bike- and pedestrian-friendly.

Traffic circles have been on planners' and activists' minds for much longer than the current round of meetings, e-mails, and phone calls. Ever since the City Council adopted a moratorium on installing new speed humps several years ago, traffic circles have been viewed as one of the few devices available to Berkeley that have the potential to calm traffic. Nevertheless, during the first half of 2003 several developments converged that have made traffic circles a subject of discussion and concern.

First was a November 2002 plan from Assistant City Manager for Transportation Peter Hillier proposing installation of more than 30 traffic circles city-wide. About half of these would be placed on bike boulevards. Hillier's proposal was for what he described as "semi-permanent" traffic circles. In contrast to more expensive, fully landscaped permanent circles, these are characterized by placement on existing road surfaces (instead of excavation of the surface); curbs made of recycled, heavy-duty rubber bolted to the road surface; an interior that can be filled with a variety of materials such as asphalt that will not spill out onto the roadway; and the possibility of including landscaping planters. So far only one example of such a traffic circle can be found in Berkeley. Located at the intersection of Cornell, Page, and Santa Fe, north of the intersection of Gilman and San Pablo, it's shown in the photograph on this page [of the Newsletter].

The more expensive traffic circles cost approximately $24,000 each. The less expensive ones can be installed for about $8,000 each.

According to Councilmember Miriam Hawley, although there is great demand for traffic circles, most neighbors prefer the more expensive kind. A noteworthy example is the traffic circle at Woolsey and Bateman in the lower Elmwood neighborhood. For years neighbors have worked together to maintain and landscape this traffic circle. Somewhat similar, though smaller, permanent traffic circles can be found on Ellsworth between Dwight and Russell.

In her recommendations for the 2003-04 city budget, Councilmember Hawley proposed spending up to $140,000, plus another $50,000 already allocated for traffic calming, on the more substantial and expensive types of traffic circles. "Neighborhoods don't want the low-cost circles," she said in an interview with BFBC. The more costly circles, she said, "even have trees in them and are quite beautiful."

"Landscaped circles are beautiful, especially with trees," says BFBC Co-Chair Mark Abrahams. "But, given the limited budget available for all transportation projects, is it appropriate to pay for what is essentially a landscaping project out of the transportation budget? To build 30 no-frills circles at $8,000 each will cost $240,000 and will address the needs of traffic calming. With planters like the ones at the Cornell-Page-Santa Fe circle, they look much better than the bare expanses of asphalt they replace. To build 30 beautiful traffic circles at $24,000 each will cost $720,000. That's nearly a half-million additional, and it should not come out of other transportation projects the city has in the pipeline. If fewer circles are built because they're triple the price, that raises issues of equity. Why should some locations be kept waiting because other locations insist on luxury-class circles?"

Hawley's original proposal was to use Measure B funds for bicycle and pedestrian amenities to cover the cost of the new traffic circles. At its June meeting, however, the Transportation Commission strongly resisted this use of the Measure B funds. In a last-minute proposal at the June 24 City Council meeting to discuss the 2003-04 budget, Hawley then suggested that up to $140,000 come from the $170,000 annually earmarked for bicycle improvements from the city's general fund. The council adopted Hawley's amendment. The question of whether or not this decision will withstand challenges was unresolved at press time. BFBC will provide regular updates on our web site, www.bfbc.org.

Plans for traffic circles also had tongues wagging this spring in West Berkeley's Ocean View neighborhood. For years neighbors on Ninth St., a bicycle boulevard, have complained to the city about traffic short-cutting through their neighborhood by crossing San Pablo on Delaware, turning left onto Ninth at the diagonal diverter, and speeding on to University, thus avoiding the congestion at University and San Pablo. One possible solution suggested by Assistant City Manager Hillier is a traffic circle at Ninth and Delaware as part of a plan to install new traffic circles throughout the neighborhood.

Although up in arms about the fast, short-cutting traffic, some neighbors are wary of replacing the diverter at Ninth and Delaware with a traffic circle. They say this might open up the area to even more traffic. At press time Councilmember Linda Maio was attempting to reconcile the various sides.

Hillier notes that the Berkeley Fire Department (BFD) has its own concerns about the proposed proliferation of traffic circles. The BFD wants to ensure a maximum travel time of four minutes from the nearest station to a fire or disaster. In order to achieve this goal, the BFD will want to comment on each circle and run tests to make sure the circles do not slow down its safety vehicles. The fate of each circle will most likely be decided on a case-by-case basis. Five circles in the LeConte neighborhood have already made the cut, however, and will not be subject to the BFD's travel-time review.

Thanks to Ted Gartner for his assistance in researching and writing this article.

BFBC letter to City Council re Diversion of Measure B funds, 24 June 2003

[BFBC letterhead]
24 June 2003

Mayor Tom Bates and Members of the City Council
City of Berkeley
2180 Milvia St.
Berkeley, CA 94704
fax 644-8801

Re: Measure B Bike-Ped Safety Funds are NOT for Landscaping Enhancements

Dear Mayor Bates and Councilmembers:

A proposal is being floated to use a portion of the City's Measure B Bike-Ped Safety funds to pay for upgrading future traffic circles from no-frills semi-permanent (approximately $8,000 each, according to the City's Office of Transportation) to permanent with enhanced landscaping (approximately $24,000 each).

The Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition, on behalf of thousands of bicyclists in Berkeley, is strongly opposed to this. The Measure B Bike-Ped Safety funds are specifically intended for bike and ped safety improvements; and this is how this portion of the measure was presented to the voters. Using these funds to pay for landscaping upgrades is unacceptable -- especially given the great unmet need for bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements and the relative lack of funds to do so.

(References: Alameda County 20-Year Transportation Expenditure Plan, July 2000, Appendix A, page A-II, available online at http://www.acta2002.com/images/expenditure_plan_v14.pdf; and Measure B itself, online at http://www.co.alameda.ca.us/rov/pdf_folder/CM-B.pdf.)

We note that the Transportation Commission, by a vote of 8-0-1 at its meeting of 19 June (item C4), made essentially the same recommendation to you.

For the record, BFBC favors the use of traffic circles where appropriate, and especially where installed in conformance with the city's Bicycle Plan. Such installation should include the reversal or removal of stop signs along the bicycle boulevards as anticipated in the Bicycle Plan.

BFBC also favors enhanced landscaping whenever appropriate funding can be identified; and we hope that it can be identified. But Measure B Bike-Ped Safety funds are not appropriate for landscaping enhancements.

On behalf of BFBC,

Mark Abrahams
Co-Chair, Board of Directors


BFBC Home | About Us | Events | Issues | Maillist | Newsletter | Positions | Resources | Safety | Subcom | Volunteer