Why do they miss the point? Because Boards of Directors are supposed to support the organizations they direct. In the non-profit world, the Board of Directors is supposed to be a cheerleader for the organization, with members speaking on behalf of the organization, advocating for it, and raising money.  As I see it, this also means the Board must have an intimate understanding of the organization it directs and, in the case of Regional Transit, this means riding the bus.  Not just light rail either. Ride the bus. And it means standing up for transit in their respective chambers or, as RT rider put it, “take transit back to their ‘day’ jobs.”

But unlike a non-profit Board, RT’s Board is made up of elected officials, no doubt because RT’s charter insists that they be there. That means that, for each city council or county board of supervisors involved, somebody has to draw the short straw and serve.

If RT’s Boardmembers aren’t willing to experience the services RT provides, then perhaps they should step aside for others who do care.

Or maybe RT should consider a change to its charter. It might be time to include non-elected officials on the Board.  It might be time to include a few RT consumers on the Board or even *gasp* create an elected Board of Directors.

One of the myriad ways CalTrans is suggesting people avoid the whole I-5 mess during the next couple months is by taking transit. Granted, those likely most affected by the construction will be those living north and south of town, and as we well know, RT doesn’t serve any neighborhood very well that didn’t exist prior to the early 1970s (and even then, some of those it doesn’t serve so well). Nevertheless, transit should be one alternative.

RT could take the I-5 lemons and made lemonade. It could work with the North Natomas TMA or on its own to provide additional lines of service into that area. It could put more buses onto some of the main lines affected by the I-5 closure and increase service frequency. If enough people rode these buses and found them useful, perhaps these could become permanent changes. At the very least, RT could be using Fix I-5 as a marketing opportunity — a chance to convince people to ride the bus.

Instead, RT chose to ignore the fruit basket. Like an increasing number of people, I get my information from websites. If I wanted to find out what RT was doing to play its part in helping Sacramento cope with the temporary loss of a major freeway, I would visit www.sacrt.com, and I would find…nothing. As of this evening, RT’s website does not mention the I-5 project. Even when I click on “Rider Alerts,” I don’t find any information.

Area transit services are little better. Yolobus has no information on the I-5 closure, but Etran posted the alternate information for its affected route. Yuba-Sutter Transit has a link to the Fix I-5 project, but, as far as I can tell, no additional information. The North Natomas TMA posted information about how the closure will impact its shuttle service.

With oil prices on a permanent upward trend, and with ridership already way up, here is yet another opportunity to get people to start that arduous cultural shift away from the single-occupancy automobile.

Quo vadis, Regional Transit?

What would increase Sacramento’s share? The article states:

Advocates who push for amenities such as bike lanes and racks make a difference, and so do cities and counties that hire people primarily to be responsible for bike issues, said Walt Seifert, executive director of the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates.

Is that what makes Portland so different?

Partly. Portland’s transportation department does have bicycle specialists. Portland also has a program to help business owners install bike racks. Portland also has plenty of bike lanes and an inherent understanding of what a “bike route” (a designated street without a bike lane) is — “bike routes” in Portland will have minimal controls such as stop signs in the directions of travel. Not so, Sacramento, at least not in the residential parts of the grid, which I call “land of the four-way stop.”

But really it’s about attitute. Portland is:

Hippy-dippy. Portlanders take their environmentalism seriously. The city that was originally self-righteous about its recycling was determined to maintain its lead once other metropolitan areas got in on the act. What better way than to become self-righteous about, er, promote cycling? Heck, even former city commish and current Congressman Earl Blumenauer commutes by bike.

All wet. Portlanders say you call tell a native because he is the one without an umbrella. Even though that’s basically bullshit, it is true that Portlanders have learned to cope with doing more outdoors in mildly crappy weather, including bicycling. You’ll see ponchos, fenders, people packing towels, even the occasional cyclist with an umbrella (stupid, but true). If you watched the Blumenauer video you heard a quip about weather in Portland.

Prone to mythology. Almost every Portlander either knows someone who, or knows someone who knows someone who, took a Kryptonite lock to the windshield of a pickup truck from Gresham. See also cyclists who compare speeding tickets at the local coffeehouse.

I think a little mythology couldn’t hurt, but I’m not suggesting that Sacramentans suddenly become patchouli-wearing, bongo-playing, hippies or that we flagrantly disregard the danger of riding in century-mark heat.* Instead, I think we need to be more aware of what we have: a city that is increasingly catering to cyclists, that is flat enough that poor, overweight me could do a 50 mile ride in summer heat without training and without any lasting side effects, that has a strong cycling community already (groups like SABA, the Bike-Hikers, and Bicycle Kitchen), and that has plenty of wide, suburban streets (they must be good for something). There is also the American River Bike Trail, which is far more than a park with a ribbon of asphalt. It is a bicycle highway connecting suburbs to downtown (albeit not as efficiently or safely as it could), a training ground for cyclists of all stripes, and the best publicity a city looking to increase its cycling profile could ask for.

*It can be done. Ride slowly, keep hydrated, wear your sunglasses, change into something more comfortable, and feel free to stop and smell the roses, or chat with the neighbors, or sit and have a cup of iced coffee at Peets, etc.

If you honk at the Saturn in front of you, rest assured I am making a negative comment on your intelligence and calling you by a popular anatomical term.

By the way, the intersection of Broadway and 19th Street is a popular place for people to ignore the street lights.

The May/June issue has a feature called “How to Stretch your Gas Dollars.” I’ll summarize for you: don’t drive like a maniac, tune up your car, shut off when you idle (I hate this one), clean your trunk, and don’t use the Ronco patented gas genie. You know what’s missing, don’t you?

Of course you do. I wouldn’t be writing about this list if it weren’t missing.

DRIVE LESS.

I’m sorry for shouting, but even a magazine dedicated to driving should understand that the single best way to stretch gas dollars is not to drive around searching for gas that is five cents per gallon cheaper. It is about not driving at all. People like me will continue to drive for pleasure because that’s the way we were raised. But when I get to where I’m going, you can bet I’ll walk as much as I can. There’s no shame in that, and AAA should start taking that angle when they try to tell people how to save money on gas.

Here’s the best part: if Americans seriously tried to drive less, we’d probably see gas prices fall a little. It’s basic supply and demand.

10. Aspire to carlessness

Not everyone is going to be able to do it, at least not cold carkey. It will probably entail a shift in thinking and some time, but living carfree might be more within reach than you think. Living closer to work and school is a big part of it. Walking, biking, public transport, car sharing, car borrowing, and teleconferencing are a strong arsenal of tools to help reduce the need for a car. Give it some thought.

For most of us, carlessness is a dream, but choosing to do things without a car doesn’t have to be. I have effectively lived without a car for several months at a time, in one case I had a dead battery and no one ever bothered to complain about my beat up pickup parked in front of their house. In another, my mechanic had my car for a series of two to four week periods. It can be done.

One of the projects they mention is an attached home development, and they’re considering shared underground parking. Provided there is adequate storage available for the units, I think this is a fine idea. Depending on the nature of the units, I think separate garages is possible, but probably not the best use of land.

One development I was impressed with are the Riva condominiums in West Sacramento. My wife and I toured the models and were very impressed with the way they’d managed to create condos with significant living space (up to 1,700 square feet) in relatively small footprints. One problem, however, was the garages opened on multiple sides, requiring far more asphalt than a shared parking structure would have required.

I’m a big fan of minimizing the use of automobiles (despite the inexplicable fact that I’m a NASCAR fan), but the car isn’t going away. I own one. And anywhere I live, I’d need someplace to park it, preferably where I wouldn’t have to pay by the hour.

So, even though modern enlightened design downplays the car — for example by placing garage entries on alleyways instead of on the street in the suburban snout-house fashion — there has to be room for the damned things somewhere.

First, meters. If you’re familiar with the Florin Road/I-5 North on ramp, you know it’s a bit of a nail biter. First, to get to it, you need to cross traffic getting off the freeway and merge in front of it. Then, you need to drive along a tight curve to the right. Finally, before you merge onto the freeway, you have to cross in front of traffic getting off of the freeway. It was a poorly designed interchange to begin with.

And now they’re going to meter it.

I don’t mind meters. Supposedly, “Ramp meters are claimed to reduce congestion (increase speed and volume) on freeways by reducing demand and by breaking up platoons of cars” (Wikipedia).

But putting a meter at the Florin I-5 North on ramp leaves me scratching my head because you aren’t entering the freeway right away. First, you have to cross traffic getting off the freeway onto Florin heading west. This means that, even if your meter light is green, you’ll have to wait for traffic to pass in front of you. So, if you follow the law religiously, you’ll have to wait for the combination of a green light and enough room to get moving onto the freeway on ramp. This also means that you’ll be entering this already dangerous strip of road from a dead stop, increasing the distance required to slip in between exiting cars.

And now, Complete Streets. As you might expect, I’m a big fan of the complete streets concept. The idea is to acknowledge that the only way to get between two points is not necessarily with a car. Streets are designed to accommodate cars, transit vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, wheelchairs, and skater punks. Maybe not that last one. Maybe.

Planners in Sacramento, no doubt the same ones who put a meter where it won’t do much good, are now to be tasked with incorporating multi-modal transportation into their road designs. An upgrade to Hazel Avenue will even include space for horseback riders using the recreation area. The Measure A sales tax will be providing the money and gives teeth to the Complete Streets concept:

Next month, the first dollars from the county’s massive $10 billion Measure A transportation sales tax will start flowing. That measure, approved by voters in 2004, includes a simple but noteworthy statement: “Routine accommodation of bicycles and pedestrians shall be included in all transportation projects.”

Such projects won’t be without their challenges, but that’s why we pay our engineers, isn’t it?