Capital City Trail funding

Background

The Capital City trail is a paved multi-use path which travels roughly east-west along the southern edge of Madison. When it opened in 2000, it was an instant hit - everybody loves it.

However, Dane County Parks, which is charged with maintaining the trail, is considering a user fee as a funding source for maintenance. Their proposal is to require a state trail pass for use of the trail. Many cyclists consider the fee unfair and bad policy.

Contact information:

Ken LePine, Dane County Parks Director, 246-3895 lepine@co.dane.wi.us
Kathleen Falk, County Executive 266-4114, falk@co.dane.wi.us
Your County Superviser: look it up.

Updates


March 5, 2003: The Dane County Board has come up with a partial solution to this issue: an exemption for self-described transportation riders working to get state funding for bike path: To get the exemption, you can fill out the "Commuter User Statement" (PDF) This is NOT a reimbursement - it is an application for a free pass.; Joe King says:
Those that have followed the history on this story know that we should have never gotten to this point. I'm not inclined to let that spoil the fact that in doing this Dane County has acknowledged the benefit to society non-motorized transportation brings and has taken a positive step toward encouraging people to use it.; Bicyclist commuters may escape trail fee , Wisconsin State Journal article; County floats bike trail fee compromise , Capital Times article.; Clear trails for bikers, editorial by the CapTimes supporting the new resolution.
Editorial, Nov. 17: Bikers, pay the fee, then happy trails to you; This smarmy editorial breezily dismisses the opposition to the fee, without addressing any issues of substance.
Dane County Parks Commission, November 13, 2002: Cyclists show up at this meeting to oppose the trail fee. We get decent coverage in the papers:; Bicyclists protest proposed trail fee Wisconsin State Journal, Nov. 14
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance reiterates its position that maintenance costs should be funded from the County Highway and Transportation department, not through user fees.: Letter to County Executive Falk, Nov. 12.
Return of the Trail Fee: November 4, 20002; In a press release,Dane County Parks announces that the trail fee is back in the budget. The announcement takes cyclists by surprise - who dropped the ball on this?; Report and analysis.
Dane County Parks Commission, July 11, 2001: The Parks commission officially decides against implementing the trail fee this year. Woo-hoo! But there's still next year. Our work is just begun.; Minutes
Dane County Board, June 21, 2001: The supervisors vote against Falk's proposal to use the Conservation Fund to pay for trail maintenance. Apparently the Parks commission decided they could get by without the extra money this year.; Minutes
COE meeting, May 21, 2001: The city of Madison Commission on the Environment passed 2 motions, supporting a free and open trail.; Minutes
Fee axed by Falk,: CapTimes Article, May 16.; Hooray! Unfortunately this is at the expense of the Conservation Fund (!?). And, there is no firm guarantee of keeping the trail free.
Letter: Sierra Club to Falk: May 15; A well written letter, detailing the Sierra Club's opposition to the fee.
Letter to concerned cyclists: from LePine, May 9,; in which he explains why he supports the trail fee.
Fee approved by Parks Comission,: "Bicyclists to pay fee for Capital City Trail"; CapTimes Article, May 10.
Bike trail may be toll road: CapTimes, May 9
Report, Parks Commission 4/25
Other comments

Report: Parks Commission Meeting, 4/25/01

by Darin Burleigh

LePine began by reviewing the issue, noting that this was the third meeting at which the user fee issue was discussed. He noted that he had received several emails on the issue and read some of them. There were several in opposition. Jeff Schimpf proposed a tax on downtown Madison parking. There was at least one supporter of the plan who preferred to remain anonymous.

The commission discussed the issue further. The trail pass would be 'reciprocal' with the state trail pass for the Military Ridge and Glacial Drumlin trails, with which the CCT will connect. It could be purchased at various venders, county offices, from rangers, etc.

The estimated cost of maintaining path, e.g. removal of brush, sand, etc. is expected to be $18,400. That does not include plowing.

One member compared use of the trail to County ski trails, which he said raise 'equity issues', since skiers have to pay a user fee.

Various alternative funding methods were discussed, including getting more state funds, and Minnesota's 'pole sticker' plan. Wisconsin may end up with a similar plan, someday, but that would be years away. Another idea was to get local businesses to contribute - on the assumption that they would benefit from happier employees, or lower health insurance premiums.

The funding for building the trail was reviewed. Dane County contributed most of the funding, however WisDOT and federal money was significant. In particular the federal funds were highway transporation funds Jim Mueller noted that we really have a hybrid trail, used both recreationally and by commuters. It is currently used by commuters at the DNR, Promega, Nicolet and others.

On the other hand, LePine read the portions of original Memorandum of Understanding between the various political entities that led to the creation of the trail, which stated that this was to be recreational. Further, that the trail was built in a park.

As the lone representative of the cycling community, I gave it my best shot: This is used for transportation. It is an important component of the Ped/Bike plan recently adopted by the City of Fitchburg. It is unfair to tax cyclists user fees, while roads are paid for out of general property taxes. I noted that there is no guarantee that these user fees would remain segregated for bicycle projects only. Using different funding models for recreation vs. transportation is absurd - if I drive a new red convertible with crushed velvet seats to the county park just for fun, is that recreation? Why should I be taxed for riding my bike to Lake Farm Park, when I can drive there for free? The funding for this should come from the Transportation Department. They spend millions of dollars on road construction, surely they can find $18,000?

( I said a bit more than that, but that's the gist of it).

Basically, it comes down to the fact that Parks is stuck with maintenance, but no one has given them more money for it. The user fee is an attempt to get the funding, without cutting funding for other Parks projects. Interestingly, more than one member of the commission felt that the 'unfair tax' argument was more persuasive than the 'transportation vs. recreation' argument.

Commentary

It is the County Transportation department that should be funding this. Perhaps the money could ultimately come from State or Federal agencies, who appreciate the value of bicycle transportation. But it should not be Parks' responsibility.

If we can persuade the powers that be to fork over the money, Parks would be happy to drop the user fee. However, my impression is that we should not wait for the Parks to take the lead on this.

Other Comments

Ron Stewart, Ph.D.

Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend today's discussion about adding a trail fee for usage of the Capital City Trail. I understand the need to raise revenue, but I believe that we are already paying for this via our property, state and other forms of taxes. These taxes are also used to pay for local roads used by cars.

Unless we are planning on charging a user fee for each use by each car of ANY road in Madison, I am opposed to adding a fee for bicycles to the Capital City Trail.

Jody McIntyre

It seems only fair to install toll booths for inbound Madison traffic. Or is that too radical to ask everyone to take responsibility for their actions, god forbid?

Jeff Schimpff

1) This trail, as well as others in the Madison metropolitan area, is in large part necessitated by the unrestricted, unregulated, and largely unplanned growth in motor vehicle trips throughout the City of Madison. Major county through roads that could serve as important bike commute link routes to and from the City of Madison are now largely unusable due to these large volumes of traffic. (McKee Road, Lacy Road, and much of Fish Hatchery Road are such roadways in the general vicinity and direction of the Capitol City Trail.) These traffic volumes both create an unpleasant bicycling environment and pose a physical threat to bicyclists through collision danger.

2) Increases in the percentage of commuters into and throughout Madison will be increasingly necessary in order to avoid a U.S. EPA designation of Dane County as an Air Quality Non-Attainment Area. (Refer to Wisconsin DNR fine particulate data on University Avenue at Franklin Street, which is barely below the U.S. EPA health violation standard, and is in excess of concentrations judged by many health studies to pose a threat of childhood cancers and asthma attack inducement.) It is in motor commuters' best interests to fund trails that can be used to encourage area commuters to use bicycle transportation to the fullest extent possible.

3) Because of the conditions under points 1) and 2), it is only just to have motor vehicle commuters pay a major share of the costs of both building and maintaining such bicycle routes.

4) The County of Dane should work with the City of Madison to promptly implement a program to collect and share revenue derived from a use-based assessment on the use of private motor vehicles for commuting. The easiest method may be to add a special property tax assessment to every employer commuter parking space in the City of Madison. An assessment of from only three cents to ten cents per commuter parking space per business day would fund nearly every city and county bicycle and traffic impact mitigation project prompted by current and future traffic volumes, for the next 20 years. (Such an assessment could alternatively be based on a square foot measurement of area devoted to commuter parking.) This assessment program can be extended to other communities in Dane County at such time as roadway volumes may pose health threats in those communities. This city-county cooperation should include lobbying the state legislature and governor, if existing fee or property tax assessment laws do not permit this type of assessment as being among the many types of special assessments that are permitted, and that are enacted every year across the state.

I believe this funding source would provide adequate funding to Dane County Parks for trail maintenance for decades to come. Thank you for your attention.

Torrey Nelson

Why is it, that the only toll ways in Wisconsin are bike routes? It would seem that it would be more efficient to collect tolls for divided limited access highways. The traffic is continuous and tolls could be collected at the entry points. Enforcement of tolls on bikeways is very difficult. The trails have many access points and it is very expensive to hire someone to patrol a trail, only to collect a few tolls. On a highway, tolls are collected almost continuously so the employees wage is easily paid for. You cannot hire someone full time to collect tolls on a bikeway and still come out ahead. Yes, you can have a self pay box at the trail head, but most people won't pay. Or, they will see the box and bike elsewhere.

We shouldn't feel obligated to pay for a nice trail in tolls (aka fees). That is what taxes are for. Heck, even the Tenney lock is free. Why do the bikes always have to pay?

Back to Advocacy

? ? ? About the BCP