#ad45

AD45 Candidate: Tricia Robbins Kasson

Tricia Robbins Kasson serves as the Economic Development Director to Councilmember Bob Blumenfield. She served as the point person for Blumenfield for the LA Great Streets Sherman Way project, which sought to improve the pedestrian experience within the Reseda commercial stretch. Her response to Bike The Vote L.A.’s questionnaire shows a deep understanding of the connections between safe streets, quality transit, affordable housing, and greenhouse gas reductions. With her commitments to improve funding for active transportation and to prioritize safety, Robbins Kasson would serve as an effective advocate for safe streets in the Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: A-

[Click HERE for Tricia Kasson’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD45 Candidate: Ankur Patel

With a Master’s Degree in Transportation Planning, it should come as no surprise that Ankur Patel is well versed in the benefits of active transportation and the challenges in providing quality mobility options. Patel’s enthusiastic support for reworking traffic laws to provide better clarity related to biking is particularly encouraging. We were also impressed with his commitment to, “make our cities more walkable and bikeable not only to reduce our dependence on cars and fossil fuels, but also to improve equity, livability, and community.” Through Patel’s words, it’s evident that he would make a strong supporter for active transportation options in the California Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: A-

[Click HERE for Ankur Patel’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD45 Candidate: Daniel Brin

As a self-identified bicyclist, Daniel Brin has first-hand experience with the need for safer streets and better bicycle infrastructure. As a member of the West Hills Neighborhood Council, he worked to communicate Vision Zero Los Angeles’ Education Campaign, and advocated to extend the L.A. River Bike Path into West Hills. Brin’s response to Bike The Vote L.A. displays a commitment to provide for a safer and more sustainable transportation system that shows he would make a strong ally within the California Assembly for the safe streets movement.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: B+

[Click HERE for Daniel Brin’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD45 Candidate: Jeff Bornstein

Jeff Bornstein’s response to Bike The Vote L.A. garnered mixed reviews. On one hand he expresses support for bicycles as a viable transportation option, but he also appears to dismiss standard bike lanes. He also focuses concern over bus emissions -- rather than the much more significant producer of pollution, emissions from private cars. His commitment to better fund bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure shows that his heart is in the right place, even if we have some reservations about his consistency in support of active transportation issues.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: B

[Click HERE for Jeff Bornstein’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD45 Candidate: Raymond Bishop

Raymond Bishop’s response to Bike The Vote L.A. is inconsistent. He stated that transit systems should be designed to reduce congestion (rather than to provide a quality mobility option) and he failed to accept that speed is a primary factor in the cause and severity of crashes. His goal of eliminating the use of fossil fuels is admirable, but we would hope to see a stronger platform from him in providing safe and efficient mobility options in order to achieve such a goal.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: C+

[Click HERE for Raymond Bishop’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD45 Candidate: Justin Clark

Justin Clark’s statement to Bike The Vote L.A. offers commitments to provide dedicated funding for active transportation and to clarify the right of people on bikes under traffic code. However, his opposition to SB-1 (the long-overdue state gas tax enacted to fund repairs to California roads caused by drivers) shows that he does not currently have a platform focused on providing a safer and more equitable transportation system.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2017 Primary Grade: C+

[Click HERE for Justin Clark’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California's annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

In California’s urban areas, including the 45th Assembly District, the issue of sustainable transportation is inextricably intertwined with other issues. California’s affordable housing crisis means that working families face long commutes that make transit, walking, or biking infeasible. In the West San Fernando Valley, much of our peak-hour congestion is caused by commutes from Western Ventura County, Simi Valley, and the Antelope and Santa Clarita Valleys. I will work to make it easier to create middle income housing to relieve this kind of transit. Similarly, I will ensure that our schools and community colleges are adequately funded and provide quality education, so parents can send their children to schools within a walkable or bikeable distance.

While most land use decisions are local, as an Assemblymember I will promote land use policies such as those in the Warner Center 2035 plan, which I helped to develop and implement, that focus intensive development in concentrated areas that are well-served by high-quality transit.

For major highway and transit projects, I will work to ensure that Caltrans and other agencies focus on providing access for all transportation modes along the corridor, instead of focusing narrowly on the specific project. For example, in $1B widening of the 405 through the Sepulveda Pass (which did not reduce peak-hour congestion at all), a small portion of that funding should have been used to construct continuous bike lanes through the Sepulveda Pass.

I will work to ensure adequate funding for the Active Transportation Program, and to secure necessary funding for the Los Angeles River Valley Bikeway.

I grew up in the San Fernando Valley, and used transit, biking and walking to get to school, parks, libraries and other places.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Yes. Unfortunately, the funds generated by the state’s cap and trade program do not begin to meet the demand for worthwhile greenhouse gas reduction projects and programs. Nevertheless, it is unacceptable that, since the beginning of the cap and trade program, only $10 million (out of more than $4 billion) has been dedicated to the Active Transportation Program. Because bicycle infrastructure projects, in particular, often require design modifications during the planning and implementation process, it is important to have funding sources that are better able to accommodate such changes (which federal funding sources often do not). A dedicated source of State funds for active transportation will become increasingly necessary as Republicans in Washington DC seek to roll back or eliminate federal funding for such projects.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

I strongly support complete streets policies, and believe that our overall transportation network must better incorporate the needs of those who walk, bike and use transit. I do not, however, support a blanket policy of requiring every individual project funded from SB1 to be designed to incorporate pedestrian, bicycle or transit facilities. California is a huge state, with widely-diverse transportation needs. In rural, mountainous areas, designing and constructing a highway project to accommodate pedestrians—where there are none—could involve a significant expense with no real benefit, which diverts funds from real needs elsewhere. On a local level, in the 45th District, Victory Boulevard runs across the San Fernando Valley, close to (and often adjacent to) the Orange Line and LA River bike paths, and it would not be a prudent use of funds (or sound policy) to include bicycle facilities should Victory be reconstructed under SB1.

This question strikes a larger point: how we ensure that the infusion of SB1 funds to address long-neglected infrastructure needs is used to create a more inclusive transportation network, and not merely re-create a solely auto-oriented system. The Complete Streets Act  requires local jurisdictions to develop multimodal networks in the circulation element of their General Plans. There are, however, few tools to ensure compliance with those plans. While every project might not need to be a “complete streets” project, every SB1-funded project should comply with the local circulation element. Also, every project on a street with a bus route should include elements to incorporate the needs of transit users. Local jurisdictions should be required to report on their progress toward implementing their complete streets networks, similar to reporting on their progress toward the Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Yes. California’s traffic safety laws should be written in plain English so they can be easily understood by the public, whether they are driving or bicycling, and easily enforced by law enforcement personnel. On nearly all streets in the 45th Assembly District, the curb lane is too narrow for a motorist and bicyclist to share. However, the existing language of Vehicle Code section 21202, which requires people on bicycles to “ride as close practicable to the right,” is dangerous. It encourages people on bicycles to weave in and out of traffic around parked cars, to ride in the “door zone” too closely to parked cars, and generally make themselves less visible and less predictable to those driving motor vehicles. Conversely, it also encourages people driving to pass those on bikes too closely, in violation of Vehicle Code 21760, and leads to harassment of people on bicycles. It is all too uncommon for a driver to yell “ride to the right” as they buzz by a vulnerable person on a bicycle. I support Vision Zero efforts to eliminate traffic fatalities and reduce serious traffic injuries.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

I would support a pilot automated speed enforcement program in California. Street racing and excessive speeding are a serious problem in the 45th Assembly District, where there are many broad, straight streets with widely-spaced traffic signals and (outside rush hour) relatively low traffic volumes. Recent multiple-fatality collisions include a November 2016 crash in Woodland Hills adjacent to a schoolyard full of children, and a June 2016 crash in a thriving commercial district on Ventura Boulevard. In the West San Fernando Valley, the Los Angeles Police Department does not have sufficient resources to devote to traffic enforcement and excessive speeding.

However, there are legitimate questions about the effectiveness of ASE, including how well it works on busy suburban streets (as opposed to limited-access highways), the amount over the speed limit that would trigger a ticket, and whether deployment at limited locations increases traffic volumes or speeding to parallel streets; privacy concerns regarding the manner in which data is collected and stored; and whether ASE would be deployed solely to maximize safety and not to generate revenue. Such questions should be addressed through a well-designed pilot program, before widespread implementation takes place.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

California’s housing crisis must be addressed, and that can best be done by adopting policies that make it easier to build more housing, in appropriate locations. It is especially important to facilitate the construction of “missing middle” housing that is affordable to hard-working families who make too much to qualify for subsidized housing and cannot afford luxury housing. I strongly support policies that allow for more housing to be built near high-quality transit, and in areas with a concentration of stores, restaurants, services and other amenities that can be accessed by walking or bicycling. I am especially proud of my work in developing and implementing the Warner Center 2035 Specific Plan, which allows for intensive development in an area that is well-served by the Orange Line and other transit, and includes plans for improving walking, biking and a local transit circulator.

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California's annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

I think it is crucial to do everything we can to dismantle and replace single-occupancy car culture with something more sustainable. I earned a Master’s Degree in Transportation Planning from Cal State University Northridge. While I was working on my thesis I served on the CSUN Sustainability Department’s Transportation Working Group (TWG). One of the projects we worked on was designing and implementing a bicycle (and skateboard) lane network that has since expanded all around the campus and set the stage for the Reseda Blvd Protected bike lane. While I know most of these battles are local, there are some ideas I have depending on the scale of time we're looking at. In the long run, I think that there will probably be an effective technological solution like driver-less cars on an automated grade-separated guideway, but that’s still very far off in terms of being a viable option in the next two years. I think that in areas like the San Fernando Valley that we can and should leverage and expand programs like “Safe Routes to School” to help us build out bicycle and skateboard lane networks around and between neighborhood schools to give kids and parents an alternative to driving an SUV half a mile to transport two students. I am a firm believer in the transformative power of education and that all sustainable culture shifts start with the youth, and that education should encourage students to use self-powered modes of travel.

I think a medium-term solutions like updating the California Vehicle Code, CEQA, The CalTrans manuals of style and all other state-level guidelines to make it easier to install protected bike lanes and paving that does something other than just trap heat, be it solar roads or permeable paving that works for our skateboard and kick-scooter riding brothers and sisters would make organizing such efforts easier and more attractive to attempt.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Yes. Improving our pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure is a crucial component of fighting climate change, and using cap and trade funds to do so is eminently logical. We must make our cities more walkable and bikeable not only to reduce our dependence on cars and fossil fuels, but also to improve equity, livability, and community.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Yes. Our streets must be retrofitted for all of our community members who use them, not just the most affluent and able-bodied who use cars. Our elderly, low-income, and disabled communities rely disproportionately on transit and walking, while youth and low-income communities rely disproportionately on bikes. Complete streets are crucial to meeting the entire community’s needs, and creating complete streets builds more enjoyable communities for everyone, including drivers.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Yes. Bikes are almost always safer when they take up the full traffic lane and when drivers are aware of this being a legal and expected possibility. I also support AB1103 which would make the “Idaho stop” (bicyclers treating stop signs as yield signs) legal in California.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

Yes. My own district includes three of the top five most dangerous intersections in the state in terms of the number of vehicle-related injuries over the past year for which there is data. Speeding near these intersections is a part of the cause, and automated speed enforcement would certainly help reduce these injuries.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California's annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

First, we need to redouble our efforts to transition from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles charged with energy from renewable sources. (For example, I charge my Volt with energy offset by the solar panels on my house.)

To this end, some of the initiatives to pursue include:

a. A requirement for all gas stations, shopping centers and medium-to-large size restaurants to include rapid-charge stations for electric vehicles. This is especially important on routes radiating from urban centers to alleviate range anxiety for potential drivers of all-electric vehicles.

b. Tax incentives for trucking firms, bus services and ride-sharing fleets to convert to electric vehicles. These incentives can be offset by a carbon tax that also makes electric vehicles more competitive.

c. Strengthen and accelerate mandates leading to eventual prohibition of internal combustion vehicles being sold in the state.

In addition, we need to strengthen and expand mass transit within and between population centers. A rail line over or through the Sepulveda Pass should be one of our highest priorities.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Absolutely, yes. I am a cyclist.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Yes.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Definitely.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

Speeding is a terrible problem that has caused many deaths in my community of West Hills. I will support any means, including automated speed enforcement, citizen reconnaissance (in cooperation with police) and aggressive prosecution of street racers, to put an end to it.

(Our West Hills Neighborhood Council is actively engaged in the Vision Zero program. We organize youth poster contests and are in the process of funding a wide variety of other projects, including bus bench ads, a bike rodeo at a local park, bike repairs and giveaways through Fleet Street, display of an LAPD “crash car” at our Spring Fest, etc. On my own, I am lobbying RiverLA to extend the River Bike Path along Bell Creek into West Hills and am arranging for a delegation from RiverLA and Gehry Associates to tour our community on March 7. I have been working on this project for several years and am excited to reach this stage.)

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?