I’ve been a little bit grumpy for the past few days, after getting word that my local office is moving in a few months, and my commute will go from being a leisurely drive on back roads to a grind on nasty freeway traffic.

However, at least I shouldn’t have to face the sort of nastiness that San Francisco commuters are facing, according to this wire service story:

Apparent Location of Cable Break

Authorities are closing down both directions of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge after a cable snapped on the upper deck of the span.

California Highway Patrol Officer Peter Van Eckhardt says the bridge will be closed for at least 24 hours so crews can try to repair the cable that snapped during the evening commute.

For any other roadgeeks who might be interested, the Bird’s Eye view at the right is of the portion of the bridge where I think (based on streaming video, but I could be mistaken) the incident occurred.   Clicking on the image will take you to where the usual bells and whistles associated with online mapping can be found.

So, those of you in Connecticut with Long Island Sound, Greenways, or similar “special” license plates – remember how the surcharge for the prettier tags were supposed to be used for Sound preservation, greenways (un)development, etc.?

That might not be happening.

From the Stamford Advocate:

Sixteen years after motorists began paying premiums for special "Preserve the Sound" license plates, lawmakers have disbanded the fund that has invested nearly $5 million in a variety of education and conservation projects.

The Long Island Sound Fund, a dedicated pot of revenue that could not be used for any other reason, will go out of business on October 1, the victim of "sweeps" by legislative leaders desperate for money to balance Connecticut’s precarious budget.

On that date, money collected by the state Department of Motor Vehicles that had gone into the fund will revert instead to the General Fund. […]

In all, the move is expected to divert more than $70 million in the fiscal year that started July 1 and more than $73 million in the second year of the $37.6 billion biennial budget recently passed by majority Democrats in the General Assembly and tacitly approved by Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who allowed it to become law without her signature. […]

Also terminated will be dedicated accounts funded by the DMV’s sale of "Greenways" and "Wildlife Conservation" marker plates.

Given the magnitude of the state’s budget crunch, it’s understandable that every bit of loose change would be scrounged to pay for state government operations.  But tapping funds that were donated for a specific purpose and which were actually being used for that purpose seems inappropriate.

Surely the state could have found $70 million/year to cut someplace, instead.  After all, how much does it cost to keep state office buildings lit all night?  What’s the state’s subsidy to local school districts that have school bus routes which stop every 50 feet or so to pick up children who are being supervised by parents sitting in their cars waiting to drive to work? 

Or how about all those ads on TV for tax law firms who promise to resolve your unpaid federal and state tax bills for pennies on the dollar; surely that hints at a little extra revenue being available.

It’s been far too long since I made a roadgeek post here.  Thanks to the Wall Street Journal, I can remedy that omission. 

Thanks to Samoa, for the first time in a few decades, we’re going to see a country change which side of the road people drive on:

Samoa is about to become what’s believed to be the first nation since the 1970s to order its drivers to switch from one side of the road to the other. That’s spawned an islandwide case of road rage. Opponents have organized two of the biggest protests in Samoan history, and a new activist group — People Against Switching Sides, or PASS — has geared up to fight the plan.

The main reason for Samoa’s switch is that two of its biggest neighbors, Australia and New Zealand, drive on the left-hand side, whereas Samoa currently drives on the right, as in the U.S. By aligning with Australia and New Zealand, the prime minister says, it will be easier for poor Samoans to get cheap hand-me-down cars from the 170,000 or so Samoans who live in those two countries. It could also help more people escape tsunamis, says Mr. Tuilaepa. […]

Opponents and some outside experts fear the switch will turn many of Samoa’s already-dangerous roads into disaster zones. Roads wind through mountainous jungle terrain with sharp turns, few traffic lights and pedestrians and dogs sharing the lanes. Critics say the switch will add further confusion with drivers likely to forget which side they’re supposed to be on.

Setting aside the coolness of this sort of a change on the roadgeek front, I do have to wonder whether such a change makes sense, at least for the reasons given.  After all, many Caribbean islands drive on the left, even though most of their cars, imported from the mainland of North and South America, are configured for right-hand drive.

Two articles from different sources, reporting on different parts of the country

Seen in the Boston Herald:

Pike officials, under fire for approving a hefty toll hike scheduled to take effect July 1, faced more heat yesterday after the Herald reported that there was a 23 percent increase in speeding tickets on the Pike during the first three months of this year compared with the same period in 2007.

State Police spokesman David Procopio said strict speeding enforcement is one of the reasons the Pike is so safe. Three people died in roadway crashes in 2008 on the 138-mile Pike, he said. There have been no fatal crashes on the Pike this year, he said. […]

But Mike Kelleher, who founded an anti-toll-increase group and lives in East Boston, said the 40 mph Ted Williams Tunnel, where he once got a speeding ticket, is heavily patrolled – and he wonders if Pike drivers are being targeted so the cash-strapped agency can bring in more dollars.

I’m sure that it’s pure coincidence that the increased visibility of state troopers on the Mass Pike happened just as noise started to be made about the Mass Pike’s dire financial condition as the market crashed.

Meanwhile, in Mississippi (via the Clarion Ledger):

Police Chief Lee Shelbourn said Monday he was told to double the number of citations and set up more roadblocks to help ease Petal’s budget crisis.

But Mayor Carl Scott and the Board of Aldermen deny giving such instructions.

Shelbourn would not disclose who gave him the instructions. He said his department did as it was told but isn’t planning to do it anymore.

"The Police Department is not supposed to be a money-making organization," he said. "Our purpose is to provide public safety to the citizens of Petal … to where they can feel safe at night."

I should mention that I don’t mind enforcement of traffic laws.  There are times I wish there were a bit more enforcement (although I wish some sanity prevailed in regards to the some of what’s being enforced.)

But traffic enforcement as a means of revenue enhancement just reeks of unfairness.

Perhaps it is pure coincidence that the Mass Pike decided to promote safety and compliance with traffic laws at this time.  But if revenue wasn’t at least part of the motivation…well, shouldn’t that increased police presence have been the norm all along?  And, isn’t adding to law enforcement costs at a time of a budget crunch rather dumb, unless that change will drive new revenue?

For those of you who are so inclined, it seems that the New York Times has a fascinating, if sad, interactive map online, showing the foreclosure rates by census tract in its primary market for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.

Given prior public debate about setting up photo radar on Avon Mountain and on I-95, as well as West Hartford’s ‘warnings only’ photo radar… well, given the tightness of the budget and congestion on Connecticut highways, it’s not surprising that some photo traffic enforcement measure would have some traction in the Connecticut legislature this session.   From the Courant:

Camera traffic enforcement bills have never gotten traction in Connecticut, but several have again been introduced this year to place radar cameras on state highways to nab speeders or to allow municipalities to install cameras at intersections to catch red-light runners.

So far, all but one have flopped, and the lone survivor still faces major problems — including criticism that camera enforcement bills aren’t all about safety but are partly motivated by a thirst for government revenue during a state budget crisis.[…]

The lone bill to survive the transportation committee would allow a two-year trial of using cameras for red light enforcement in New Haven, though the original measure would have covered all cities and towns. Another proposal — to use radar cameras for highway speed enforcement — was killed by the committee, though it was offered by Gov. M. Jodi Rell. The governor’s office refuses to pronounce it dead, but for now the New Haven bill is considered the only live one.

[S]ome — like Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, Guerrera’s fellow transportation committee co-chairman — say that it won’t be many years before a traffic camera bill becomes law, based on citizens’ gradual acceptance of camera surveillance all around them.

"Almost any business you go to, they’ve got cameras," DeFronzo said. "Larger cities have authorized cameras," such as New York and Philadelphia, to catch red-light runners. "In Europe, [radar cameras for speeders] are prevalent."

He said people commonly walk around now with "little video cameras … in their cellphones. You can be totally minding your own business, but if you look unusual or do something odd, you can end up on YouTube. It doesn’t have the same shock value that it used to."

Slippery slope, anybody?

While I won’t jump on the meme that the feds have turned socialist, I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t a Connecticut state legislator by the name of Karl Marx.  From the Greenwich Time:

A Connecticut legislative committee has endorsed a proposal to prohibit fuel distributors from charging varying amounts to gas stations based on their location.

The practice, known as zone pricing, has been criticized by lawmakers for the past several years as unfair to drivers and gas stations.

They say it inflates wholesale gas prices in wealthy areas, putting those dealers at a disadvantage and hurting consumers.

Distributors say zone pricing lets them respond quickly to local competition because they can immediately cut their prices to match those of nearby stations with lower wholesale prices.

Well, I suppose if this comes to pass…and if Massachusetts’ proposed 19¢/gallon tax hike goes through…this would at least put an end to the time-honored practice of traveling miles just to save a few cents a gallon.

At least the state hasn’t tried legislating the price of gas…yet.

I’ve been busy and have once again accumulated a pile of articles worth mentioning without having the time to go into much detail.

• Business Insurance has an article summarizing a recent Hewitt study, reporting that 19% of all employers are planning to eliminate employee health benefits over the next 3-5 years.  It’s not clear from the BI article how much of that is the result of the economy, and how much of that arises from expectations of a federal-run health care program emerging in the near future.
   
• Insurance Journal mentions that the Senate has failed to act on extending the National Flood Insurance Program.  If the program is not reauthorized by 11:59pm tonight, no new NFIP policies may be written, and NFIP policies may not be renewed starting tomorrow…..at least until a bill reauthorizing the program or a continuing resolution passes both houses.
   
• Arguments were heard yesterday before the California Supreme Court challenging Proposition 8, an initiative amending the California state constitution to prohibit previously-legal same-gender marriages.  Patrick Edaburn at The Moderate Voice notes with some disappointment that the debate suggests a 5-4 ruling upholding the validity of the Proposition.  He also expects a 5-4 ruling that marriages formalized before passage of Prop 8 would remain valid under California law. 

  If this challenge fails, I imagine pretty quickly we’ll see another suit brought on equal-protection grounds, challenging the gender inequity of Prop 8 and/or challenging the unfairness of some same-gender couples having their marriages recognized while others’ are not.
   

• The Courant has run an article reporting on a bill moving through the state legislature which would make it illegal to “block the box” – that is, to enter an intersection without the ability to exit it before the traffic light changes. 

  Personally, I’m amazed that it isn’t already illegal; I guess I need to revise my opinion of oh-so-many drivers encountered at congested intersections on my commute route from “criminal” to merely “rude”.  
   
  Of course, I expect that this bill, if it becomes law, will be at least as rarely-enforced as other recently-passed common-sense traffic laws in Connecticut – the cell-phone ban, and the requirement that drivers clear their vehicles of snow and ice.
   

• Hartford’s residual glory as the former insurance capital of the nation seems to have tarnished a bit further in recent days.   The Courant reported that the Phoenix Companies lost their biggest distribution channel recently, when State Farm stopped selling their products.  And, the Wall Street Journal passed along a rumor that The Hartford is in talks to sell its life insurance operations to Canada’s Sun Life, in an effort to staunch the flow of bad news from HIG’s economic woes.

And people wonder why I hate driving in West Hartford.   From the Courant:

Speeders beware — you are being watched.

But the speed-detection camera installed this week at Boulevard and Whiting Lane is a kind of compassionate Big Brother that just wants to slow down drivers. Those photographed traveling 45 mph or faster at this 30-mph location will get a photo with a warning letter.

The legislature prohibits using these radar cameras for enforcement purposes, so the joint effort by police, the engineering office and the public works department amounts to a public awareness campaign.[…]

Only one speed-detection unit at a time will be equipped with the camera. After this introductory period, drivers won’t know which of the units has the digital eye, McCue said.

The camera will photograph cars traveling 15 mph over the speed limit or faster. Each image shows the vehicle, with a magnified view of the front license plate.

Kraus’ staff will download the images and keep them in a computer file that will be available for public viewing. Printouts of the images will be given to the police department.

A “public awareness campaign”.  Riiight.