[MissoulaGov] committee update 12-10-08

[Patrick Klemz]

Bob,

The thing about civic responsibility is that it's subjective. To some  
people's reckoning, the tenants of civic responsibility state that,  
by the time someone reaches my age, they should have spent a year or  
two in a foreign land shooting at people who don't believe in Jesus.

As far as incentive, it really depends how the city spends the money.  
Just off the top of my head... I'd like to see better street  
sweeping--particularly on the south side of town--so I don't spend  
$50 a year in new tubes. Fixing some of Missoula's bunk intersections  
might require more capital than this program can generate, but  
there's another idea. How about more racks (specifically one outside  
the Depot)?

I think if you can justify the program to cyclists with specific  
benefits, people will go for it. Otherwise, it smells a lot like  
another revenue-generating tool for the general fund, which would not  
be cool.

On Dec 11, 2008, at 5:11 PM, Bob Jaffe wrote:


> Patrick,

> The reasons to register are limited.

> 1) small but increased odds you will get your bike returned if stolen.

> 2) civic responsibility blah blah blah

> 3) if enforcement were an issue, avoiding a ticket.

>

> Number 1 is pretty remote, number 2 obviously doesn't appeal to  

> you, number 3 is not currently applicable.

>

> Can you think of a reason to license your bike?  What incentive  

> would it take?

>

> I like the idea of offering something that is of value to  

> cyclists.  Something like the bicycle benefits program where you  

> get discounts at local merchants.

>

> bob

>

>

>

>

> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Patrick Klemz

> Sent: Thu 12/11/2008 4:56 PM

> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com

> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] committee update 12-10-08

>

> To quote Hattie McDaniel, "Asking ain't gettin."

>

> I also disagree with the sentiment. A non-motorist's contribution  

> to road maintenance through taxes far outweighs the meager amount  

> of strain they place on the infrastructure. Trails and paths are  

> good for getting people out on bikes, but should be considered, in  

> my opinion, measures that provide returns with self-evident value.  

> At the same time, a street cyclist very well may never use them.  

> Besides that, to say the government is entitled to reimbursement  

> for these expenditures from one particular group is flawed--where's  

> the tax on running shoes? On dog leashes? On cardboard that  

> transients use to make signs while camping out at bike racks? And  

> if I'm wrong, shouldn't hunters pay the Forest Service to use  

> logging roads? go ahead and try to argue that.

>

> The point I'm trying to make is the one just laid out by Nadia. You  

> asked for input, here's one cyclist's input: Why should I care?  

> That's not necessarily a criticism, unless you can't answer it. I  

> want specific reasons; not another blah-blah Missoula campaign  

> talking using idealistic buzz words in lieu of actual substance.

>

> On Dec 11, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Jed Taylor wrote:

>

>> At least in this particular case, the city doesn't care what's in  

>> your garage; it's interested what's on its streets and trails.   

>> Bikes as a form of transportation will only become more integral  

>> to Missoula.  Just as the infrastructure to support motorized  

>> vehicles costs money, so does the infrastructure to support bikes  

>> and pedestrians.  Just as motorized vehicles pay licensing fees to  

>> help support the infrastructure, so should bikers.

>>

>> Should your bike never leave your garage, it should enjoy the  

>> ability to reside in complete anonymity.  Should you decide to  

>> avail yourself of the public infrastructure that connects your  

>> garage to wherever you want your bike to take you, then it seems  

>> reasonable that the city would take an interest in that, and would  

>> expect a reasonable contribution toward providing it.

>>

>>

>>

>> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com [mailto:missoulagov- 

>> bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Klemz

>> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 14:51

>> To: Phil Smith; missoulagov at cmslists.com

>> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] committee update 12-10-08

>>

>> I'm hearing everything but justification for why the city needs to  

>> know what's in my garage. The fact that it's a law doesn't cut it-- 

>> Missoula has a wealth of laws it (thankfully) can't enforce.

>>

>> Incidentally, I speak only for myself.

>>

>> On Dec 11, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Phil Smith wrote:

>>

>>> Just for information:  all bike licenses sold get entered into  

>>> the computer; the records are kept indefinitely.  When the police  

>>> recover a licensed bike, we make every effort to find the owner  

>>> (although many owners have sold their bike to someone else and  

>>> moved away).  The bike shops (like Open Road) have a card they  

>>> have agreed to give to every bike purchaser.  The card says that

>>> “…City Ordinance requires that all bikes ridden in the city be  

>>> licensed.  If your bike is stolen and the police recover it, the  

>>> license number enables City staff to return your bike.”  It then  

>>> directs the purchaser  to go to City Hall to get a license.    

>>> When we set this up in the past year, shop owners told us it  

>>> would be much easier to handle than a license form and a cash  

>>> transaction.  Frankly, we were getting VERY low compliance with  

>>> the old system of shops selling licenses.  I don’t know how good  

>>> a job shops are doing with this newer card system.

>>>

>>>

>>> However, it does allow shops to provide information about bike  

>>> licenses easily and in a non-pushy way to their customers, and  

>>> puts the burden on the bike owner to actually get a license.

>>>

>>>

>>> Phil Smith

>>>

>>> Missoula Bike Ped Program Manager

>>>

>>>

>>> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com [mailto:missoulagov- 

>>> bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Ethel MacDonald

>>> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 2:27 PM

>>> To: Marilyn Marler

>>> Cc: missoulagov at cmslists.com

>>> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] committee update 12-10-08

>>>

>>>

>>> Re bike licensing -- I'll respond to this list to encourage  

>>> broader discussion.  I just left my licensed bike in France with  

>>> friends to avoid the hassle and expense of shipping it next time  

>>> I go, and bought a nice new one at Open Road.  I didn't even  

>>> think to license it!  Why not?  Because in the past, bike shops  

>>> sold licenses with the bike.  That is absolutely the best way to  

>>> get people to license bikes as a matter of course.  And the  

>>> reason for licensing?  So if the bike is "borrowed" and  

>>> abandoned, the City Bike-Ped office can easily find the owner.   

>>> If that hasn't been happening -- i.e. if "found" bikes are not  

>>> examined for a license, and the owners contacted, that would be  

>>> an oversight in the Bike-Ped office.

>>>

>>>    The longevity of bike licenses has never been clear -- I've  

>>> always assumed the bike license is "forever."  And the record of  

>>> license numbers should be retained forever.

>>>

>>>      Because $20 seems a little steep -- i.e. unless there's  

>>> enforcement, people would not pay it -- I would recommend $10 for  

>>> 5 years and hope that people would renew,  but also hope that the  

>>> Bike-Ped office would keep the old records anyway.  A simple  

>>> postcard reminder like the dog license ones should work -- after  

>>> all, we at least don't have to go through the hassle of getting a  

>>> rabies shot for our bikes before licensing them.

>>>

>>>      I think licensing bikes is a good idea.  Ethel MacDonald

>>>

>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Marilyn Marler  

>>> <marler at bigsky.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> Thanks Bob for the weekly updates.

>>>

>>>

>>> A clarification on the Conservation Committee- we did not approve  

>>> the new Parks fee schedule.  We just set a public hearing for  

>>> January 12th.  So people can comment on it before we approve it.  

>>> Also, I think it's worth mentioning that some folks from the swim  

>>> team community were there and they spoke in favor of the new 50 m  

>>> pool rental fees. It's nice that there has been some improvement  

>>> in communication between Parks and the swimmers, and everyone  

>>> seems happy.

>>>

>>>

>>> Also, I'd like to hear from cyclists about their positions on the  

>>> $10 for 4 years ($15/family) bike license. How do you think we  

>>> (as the city) could encourage more cyclists to purchase bike  

>>> licenses? What we came up with in committee as suggestions were:

>>>

>>> -Make available on the new city website

>>>

>>> -Give out freebies or Bike Benefits stickers with the license

>>>

>>> -Have the summer Bike Ambasssadors sell them occasionally

>>>

>>> -Better marketing of how the proceeds are spent (on programs that  

>>> benefit cyclists)

>>>

>>> -Make the license more expensive (like $20) but have it be permanent

>>>

>>> -Work with local non-profits to spread the word to their  

>>> memberships and audiences

>>>

>>>

>>> Email me off list if you like, marler at bigsky.net, or send ideas  

>>> to all of council at council at ci.missoula.mt.us  And if you don't  

>>> already have a bike license, maybe you should go get one!  

>>> Although it's a little inconvenient- you have to physically go to  

>>> the Treasurer's Office on the 2nd floor of city hall.

>>>

>>>

>>> Thanks again, Marilyn Marler

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> ----- Original Message -----

>>>

>>> From: Bob Jaffe

>>>

>>> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com

>>>

>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 11:23 PM

>>>

>>> Subject: [MissoulaGov] committee update 12-10-08

>>>

>>>

>>> Greetings,

>>>

>>> This morning I found out we have a cat ordinance.  We were  

>>> amending it to limit the number of cats a person can own to 5. If  

>>> you want more you are supposed to get a cat breeders license. We  

>>> also considered revisions to the dog ordinance. The only one I  

>>> really wanted to see more discussion on was the part about doggy  

>>> day care facilities. In the past these types of businesses were  

>>> not addressed by any of our ordinances. The zoning office had  

>>> made the interpretation that they were the equivalent of vet  

>>> clinics. The new ordinance defines doggy day care and exempts it  

>>> from the nuisance barking rule. I'm not so sure I am in favor of  

>>> this.  We have one down the street from us on second. It is in a  

>>> D zone along the tracks but is very close to a number of homes  

>>> and other businesses. I have received complaints about the  

>>> barking but they have been exempt from the rule that says you  

>>> can't let your dogs bark all day. That may be changing soon. The  

>>> public hearing will be on 12/22.

>>>

>>>

>>> In Conservation we covered a few items. We approved an agreement  

>>> where the County pays us about $65,000 per year to maintain fort  

>>> Missoula park. Once you subtract out all the fees we collect for  

>>> use of the park it ends up costing the city about an additional  

>>> $35,000 to run that park.

>>>

>>> We also approved an easement for Northwest Energy to put in a  

>>> Cathodic Well along a pipe line in the north hills.  That is a  

>>> deal to help the steel pipe from rusting by changing the way  

>>> electrolysis would naturally work against the pipe.

>>>

>>> We also approved the new parks fee schedule. Everything is going  

>>> up a few percent.

>>>

>>>

>>> In PAZ we took up the Clark Fork Terrace number one subdivision.  

>>> CFT #2 is the one where we are being sued for asking the  

>>> developer to put in trails.  There were two issues that came up  

>>> in the discussion. The trail easement and the SID waiver for off- 

>>> site improvements. Parks would like to assure that we will secure  

>>> a trail easement along the southern edge of the property that  

>>> parallels the Milwaukee trail. If we can't get an easement on the  

>>> actual old rail line we want to at least get something parallel  

>>> to it. Considering the likelihood of  litigation I probably  

>>> shouldn't say any more about the project outside of the public  

>>> meeting.

>>>

>>> We were also planning to have an update on the zoning rewrite but  

>>> our consultant got stuck somewhere do to the weather.

>>>

>>>

>>> In A&F we made a modification to our agreement on the repayment  

>>> of the brownfield revolving loan fund for the millsite project.  

>>> The $1.25 million loan is supposed to be paid back from tax  

>>> increment from the project over a number of years. During the  

>>> interim period while the clean up is happening MRA has been  

>>> paying interest only on the loan. There was a clause in the  

>>> agreement that said that if the property isn't closed on by  

>>> 1/1/09 then principal payments need to start. It was assumed that  

>>> if the deal didn't go down by then that the options to purchase  

>>> would expire and the deal would be dead. But as we have it we are  

>>> still waiting for DEQ signoff on the clean up. The property can  

>>> not be financed and purchased until this is done. The Millsite  

>>> people have negotiated another extension on the option and DEQ  

>>> approval is expected this winter.  So we took out the 1/1/09  

>>> deadline from the agreement.

>>>

>>>

>>> We also had an interesting discussion about our bike license  

>>> ordinance. We did some housekeeping on the language and then  

>>> discussed how we could make the bike license program effective.  

>>> Phil Smith, our bike ped coordinator was extremely pessimistic  

>>> about the possibility that licensing bikes would ever be embraced  

>>> by the community and the whole thing was a big waste of time. It  

>>> was tried 10 or 15 years ago and was a lot of work and never  

>>> really took off.  I'm a little more hopeful that folks can get  

>>> behind the idea of paying a small fee that would go towards  

>>> supporting bicycle programs in the city. The current fee is $10  

>>> for four years. $15 for families and $5 for children. Bikes with  

>>> wheels under 24" do not need to be registered. I'm thinking the  

>>> cycling community in Missoula has a high level of civic  

>>> engagement and would eventually be supportive of this program.  

>>> There could also be incentives thrown in to get it going. We will  

>>> also want to work with the retailers to find a way to make the  

>>> program work for them.

>>>

>>>

>>> The other A&F item we discussed was the sewer rate increase. The  

>>> general consensus was that we wanted to wait to approve any rate  

>>> increase until the study on flow based billing was complete. I  

>>> will be more comfortable voting for the rate increase if it is  

>>> combined with the new billing based on usage. That way the low  

>>> users of the system will hopefully see a rate decrease. It is  

>>> possible we will have the information needed some time this spring.

>>>

>>>

>>> In Public Works we approved the request to make changes to our  

>>> rules on deicer. We removed the restrictions on corrosiveness and  

>>> we now allow solid products.  The argument was that our streets  

>>> department will do everything possible to find the best solutions  

>>> and we shouldn't tie his hands. Stacy and I voted for an  

>>> amendment that would make the change sunset next fall but that  

>>> failed.

>>>

>>>

>>> Thank you for your interest,

>>>

>>>

>>> Bob Jaffe

>>>

>>> Missoula City Council, Ward 3

>>>

>>> bjaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us

>>>

>>> 406-728-1052

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of  

>>> Missoula. But posts to this list may be entered into the public  

>>> record.

>>> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

>>> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of  

>>> Missoula. But posts to this list may be entered into the public  

>>> record.

>>> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

>>> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> -- 

>>> "Rocks in the water do not know the suffering of rocks in the sun."

>>> Haitian proverb, www.GrassrootsOnline.org

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of  

>>> Missoula. But posts to this list may be entered into the public  

>>> record.

>>> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

>>> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

>>

>> Patrick M. Klemz

>> Missoula Independent

>> w: 406.543.6609 x109

>> c: 406.214.2425

>> pklemz at missoulanews.com

>>

>>

>>

>

> Patrick M. Klemz

> Missoula Independent

> w: 406.543.6609 x109

> c: 406.214.2425

> pklemz at missoulanews.com

>

>

>


Patrick M. Klemz
Missoula Independent
w: 406.543.6609 x109
c: 406.214.2425
pklemz at missoulanews.com



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20081211/2b1fa954/attachment.htm>