<<  <  >  >>

· Getting a metropolitan area to endorse

pollution from vehicles."29

vanpooling (as 18 metro regions did) or

telecommuting (as 5 did) would reduce

While a step in the right direction, these

driving by 1 to 17 million miles per

procedural changes do not guarantee any

year.

substantive changes in the program. EPA did

not promise to stop funding the nine organi-

Despite all of EPA's fine calculations, in

zations that have received the bulk of the pro-

reality Americans drove 3 percent more in

gram's money to date, only to stop funding

1997 than they did in 1996, the largest

the "network." The TransAct Web site is

increase in five years.2 7 That suggests that

already in place and maintenance costs can

be far lower than start-up costs. And chang-

EPA's programs probably had little effect on

ing the grant-making process does not neces-

driving. Although EPA's claimed 1.25 billion

sarily change who gets the money. For exam

-

miles sounds like a lot, it is in fact only 0.05

ple, a nonprofit organization whose goal is to

percent of the total miles driven by

reduce air pollution by reducing congestion

Americans in 1997, according to the Federal

Highway Administration.2 8 In fact, 1.25 bil-

through highway capacity increases probably

will not be funded since the goal of the

lion miles is only 1.7 percent of 1997's annu-

Transportation Partners program is to

al growth in driving.

reduce driving, not pollution.

EPA's Promises of Reform

The authors expect to closely monitor the

program to see if these procedural changes

In response to congressional criticism of

translate into any substantive changes.

the Transportation Partners program, EPA

Meanwhile, Browner's letter says nothing at

Administrator Carol Browner sent a letter to

all about EPA's other grant-making program

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) promising

to urban nonprofits: the Smart Growth

"changes that will substantially improve the

Network program.

program's accountability and balance." Some

of the changes are these:

· "EPA will no longer fund the nine

EPA's Smart Growth

Procedural

Network Program

Principal Partners to maintain a net-

work" of 340 other organizations.

changes do not

· EPA funds will no longer support the

If the main goal of the Transportation

guarantee any

TransAct Web site, an STPP site that

Partners program is to reduce automobile

substantive

says it was funded by EPA.

driving, the goal of smart growth is more par-

· EPA is replacing the noncompetitive

ticularly to redesign cities and suburbs to dis-

changes in the

courage driving and force people to consume

grant process used to fund the nine

program. EPA did

less land. Smart growth itself is a populariza-

Principal Partners with a competitive

not promise to

tion of ideas that planners call the "New

bidding (RfP) process "open to all

Urbanism." These ideas include compact

transportation and environmental

stop funding the

urban development; mixtures of residential,

organizations."

nine organiza-

· EPA "will initiate a dialogue" with a

commercial, and retail development; heavy

reliance on mass transit and pedestrianism;

new group "called the Transportation

tions that have

and traffic "calming" to discourage automo-

and Environmental Network." This

received the bulk

bile usage. These policies were pioneered in

network will review projects funded

of the program's

Portland, Oregon, but the term "smart

under the RfP process. Highway groups

growth" was first used in Maryland.

will be invited to be a part of the net-

money to date,

EPA has endorsed smart growth by form

-

work, which will also "provide an

only to stop fund-

ing a Smart Growth Network partners pro-

opportunity to discuss and undertake

gram that parallels the Transportation

cooperative activities to help reduce

ing the "network."

7