Here it is folks. Parents' Coalition has obtained the Piedmont Environmental Council's study on the 'political climate' for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Montgomery County. The study was funded with a $43,000 grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. We don't usually think of the Rockefeller Foundation as funding the political shenanigans of wealthy, progressive Montgomery County, but you never know.
Both the Purple Line, and the Science City/Corridor Cities Transitway are called out in the study. The neighborhood civic federations are also discussed. However, from what we have seen, no neighbors or civic federations are aware this planning is even happening. Don't believe us? Ask your neighbors.
Interestingly, no one interviewed for the study is named, instead, the author relies on phrasing like, "Another real estate figure, extremely knowledgeable about the D.C. market in general..." (page 13) or, "At least one individual...estimates..." (page 14). There are no citations or references to 'personal communication,' and no Reference section. But see for yourself...
Prospects for BRT in Montgomery County Coalition for Smarter Growth Piedmont Environmental Council Study Ju...
Piedmont Environmental Council
ReplyDeletein support of its project, the Coalition for Smarter Growth, to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the political climate and prospects for Bus Rapid Transit in Montgomery County, Maryland
http://www.pecva.org Location: Warrenton, VA
Initiative: Transportation
Region Served: Maryland
TERM of the Grant: 12/1/2011 – 6/30/2012
Amount: $43,000
This was the Rockefeller Grant amount.
DeleteAbout Us
ReplyDeleteThe Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) was founded in 1972 to promote and protect the Virginia Piedmont's rural economy, natural resources, history and beauty. Headquartered in Warrenton, VA, we have offices throughout a nine county Piedmont region that includes Albemarle, Clarke, Culpeper, Fauquier, Greene, Loudoun, Madison, Orange and Rappahannock counties.
As the authors of the report for the Rockefeller Foundation, the team at the Coalition for Smarter Growth appreciates your attention to the proposal for Bus Rapid Transit in Montgomery County. The region’s leading conservation groups founded the Coalition in 1997. Since that time we have been dedicated to helping the region grow in a more sustainable manner, focusing on the benefits of walkable, transit-accessible neighborhoods and the transit investments necessary to provide alternatives to driving in traffic, save households money, improve access to jobs, save greenspace, and reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
ReplyDeleteWith that in mind, we investigated the Montgomery County BRT proposal and the perspectives of major stakeholders to assess the major issues and levels of political support. We also examined lessons learned from other jurisdictions that have implemented or have attempted to implement BRT projects and networks. This was not intended to be a technical report on the design or operations of the system. We do not identify our interviewees in the report because most of our interviewees wanted the opportunity to speak freely and without attribution.
We wish to make clear that the Piedmont Environmental Council is solely our fiscal agent. The Coalition’s staff is solely responsible for our program, and this report is entirely the work of our staff and completed with no involvement by PEC.
We are keen to see that local community members are as engaged as possible in discussions about the next generation of transit including the Montgomery County BRT proposal. If you have questions or comments about BRT or the Coalition for Smarter Growth’s interest in the subject, please reach out to us at action@smartergrowth.net or www.smartergrowth.net
"We do not identify our interviewees in the report because most of our interviewees wanted the opportunity to speak freely and without attribution."
DeleteThen you didn't interview "major stakeholders". Major stakeholders are not a secret. Major stakeholders are known, not hidden. This is not engagement, this is back room deals.
Ever heard of the Maryland Open Meetings Act? Do you understand how you are working to thwart that Maryland law? If not, take the Maryland Open Meetings Act online course. Report back when you have a certificate of completion.
Stewart, thanks for your comments. However, the document as it stands cannot really be used as a decision document, either for the Council, Mr. Leggett, or the citizens and neighbors in the County. It is lacking in references and data, and although your organization may not have meant it to, comes across as another pro-BRT PR stunt rather than a thoughtful study on the pros and cons of a BRT in the county.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, it was difficult to obtain the study. It appears that it was not completed in concert with the Transit Task Force's studies, or at least, was not mentioned on their website or in any conversations people had with their members, even though people in the community had been asking for it for months, since its existence became public knowledge. From what I know, neither Councilmember Berliner or Elrich, both of whom are on the Transit Task Force, ever mentioned this study. As an aside, one person that was interviewed has now read the document and has said that it does not represent their statements in the interview.
Regarding sustainability, the buses apparently will run on diesel fuel. None of the documents I could find identified the tonnage of GHG released by operation of the 160-mile BRT routes, even in models.
To the Rockefeller Foundation: a better use of the $43,000 would have been to hire a legitimate independent environmental engineer to provide some data and calculations, and modelling on sustainability and whether this BRT plan is really going to be sustainable.
As a clarification, I understand the PEC is no longer the fiscal agent of the CSG.
Finally, the lack of transparency remains a critical failing of the BRT effort.