Which party controls the Mecklenburg County board of commissioners – which was still unclear Wednesday afternoon – could have some potentially far-reaching effects on how the county grows and how it pays for the growth.
As I write this midafternoon Wednesday, it looks as if the Democrats will control the board. Two of the three at-large seats were won by Democrats: Jennifer Roberts was top vote-getter and Parks Helms came in third. Republican Dan Ramirez was second. But only 78 votes separated Helms from fourth-place finisher Kaye McGarry, with 1,340 provisional ballots due to be counted Nov. 17. So if McGarry were to overtake Helms and win a seat, the board majority would be Republican.
So what would that mean? Two big issues come to mind. One is transit – which plays a major role in shaping where development goes and what kind of development it is. The board’s current Republicans pushed unsuccessfully in October to study whether to hold a referendum to repeal the transit sales tax. District 1 rep Jim Puckett, who seems not to have been re-elected, was particularly outspoken: He thinks any such tax ought to go to roads, not mass transit.
The other issue is whether to find alternative revenue sources to help take the pressure off property taxes to pay for growth-related needs, such as schools, parks, etc.
I thumbed through notes from interviews with five of six at-large candidates before the election, and I hauled out the candidate questionnaire published in the Charlotte Business Journal by the Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition’s political action committee.
First, the questionnaire: One key question was whether candidates would support real estate transfer taxes and/or impact fees – two methods some other N.C. counties use to raise revenue for growth-related costs. Another was whether local governments should be allowed to adopt adequate public facilities ordinances as a way to stop or slow growth. Those ordinances say new development can’t overload public facilities, such as schools and roads. Typically developers pay into a fund to bring public facilities up to par or else phase developments to give public facilities time to catch up. So the question’s phrasing was a bit disingenuous, or not well informed.
The answers? Roberts said she’d be “willing to explore all the options,” including impact fees and land transfer taxes. She gets multiple bonus points for being the only one to point out a gigantic flaw in the APFO question. “Local governments are already allowed to adopt APFOs. Davidson has one.” Nicely done, especially the part where she neglected to say whether she’d consider one here.
Ramirez didn’t respond to the questionnaire.
Helms wouldn’t support transfer taxes or impact fees. He said local governments should be able to adopt APFOs.
McGarry said no to transfer taxes and impact fees and said governments have the authority to keep up with infrastructure as they approve projects. That’s technically correct, though I think if Charlotte City Council suddenly started rejecting development plans due to road incapacity, they’d be hit with lawsuits.
Republican Jim Puckett, who finished fifth for an at-large seat and isn’t likely to win, said no to both. Democrat Wilhelmenia Rembert, who finished sixth, said yes to both.
Among district winners, Republican Karen Bentley said no to both. Democrat Norman Mitchell didn’t respond, but he’s said before he favors looking at those options. Democrat Dumont Clarke said he’d like to see both studied.
Dan Bishop and Bill James, both Republican, and Valerie Woodard, a Democrat, didn’t have opponents and so weren’t included in the questionnaire.
Now the issue about transit, from my notes:
Roberts: Voted against studying a transit tax repeal when it came before the board in October. Helms: Ditto. Rembert: Ditto.
Ramirez: Apparently we editorial board members who interviewed him didn’t ask about it. (Twenty lashes with a wet noodle!)
McGarry: Would put a transit tax repeal on the ballot.
Puckett: Proposed studying transit tax repeal. Voted against transit tax in 1998 and thinks roads are a better use of tax money than mass transit.
Bentley: “No hard answers” on a transit tax repeal measure but supports looking at it. Voted against transit tax in 1998.
Mitchell: Voted against studying transit tax repeal.
Bishop and James: Voted for studying transit tax repeal.
So what happens next? We'll have to keep watching.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Controlling growth -- or not
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
49 comments:
Hopefully the idiots who are against mass transit will get the boot. Charlotte, you will be sorry if a transit system is not implemented now - thats all I have to say.
Remember the saying "you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy?"
No public transportation system is going to pry these people out of their personal vehicles until the cost of fuel becomes astronomical.
Given the current course of events, though, that could happen within the next 10 years.
Anyone with half a brain could see that transit needs to be supported now and in the future for Charlotte Mecklenburg. I think McGarry lacks one though. Keep the obstructionist and regressive At Large Republicans off the MCC!!! Do we really want a former School Board Member in the majority? Kaye McGarry was such a logical,constructive and consensus building voice on that board. Give me a break.
Transit and development are joined at the hip. As Charlotte continues its growth, both suburban and rural areas as well as near town infill and Downtown Hi Rise Condos will continue. The area near the core of the city cannot widen roads, or build new ones, or make more off ramps from the interstates, there is no land to do that.
Whether a person uses transit or not should not be considered when thinking of installing it. I have no children, should I want a vote against taxes that support schools?
Developers do have a responsibility to the communities they build to help support the infrastructure they will be using. The current TOD zoning which supports development around the light rail corridors will revitialize areas that have infrastructures in place, and add to them with the rail line. One only needs to look at South Boulevard, and the transition in progress.
Our government is elected to lead and make tough desicions, many not immediately popular, for the long term growth of our community. I would challenge all elected officials to look past their party affiliation and look into the future to create the city we will be left with.
Ahhhhhh, some smart posts at last.....so far.
We should spend billions on light rail which, in Ron Tober's words will 'help us 50 years from now.' Yet we have roads that need expanding NOW but GovCo complains we don't have the money. That doesn't make sense.
Billions for trains.
No money to complete 485 for 5-8 years, if not longer.
Billions for trains.
No money for widening 485.
Millions of dollars for bicycle paths, yet the cycle-geeks never ride on them. Ballantyne Commons Parkway added a bike lane yet the bicyclists still ride on Rea Road obstructing traffic. Why don't they ride on BCP?
Now they want even more millions for more bicycle paths that the bicyclists still won't use.
Billions for 'development' near the light rail line.
Yet Providence Road is one lane each way at the Meck / Union County border
What genius designed 485 but didn't plan to finish it for another 8-10 years?
Hopefully we'll be considered officially "world-class" when the light-rail is complete. Oh Boy!
Pure.
Utter.
Genius.
GovCo, bicycle geeks, etc., etc.
It's simple. You obviously don't like city living. Why not just move ? It's simple. We are surrounded by counties that are very close by. Another 10 minutes to your commute you love so much should be a breeze.
JUST LEAVE PLEASE.
Let the rest of us move forward.
You will be happier in the long run and so will we.
TNX
Uncle Dennis, you said "government is elected to lead." No, they're elected to represent the people. There's a rather large difference. In the former case one assumes they are smarter and more capable than the people, know best what the people SHOULD want, and need to be able to lead those people therefore to what is best for them IN SPITE of what they want. That describes a benevolent dictatorship, not a free people.
They are elected to do the bidding of the people. That certainly means that at times they must make deisions in the absence of a clear knowledge of what the people want, but it NEVER means that they should ignore the known will of the people and ALWAYS means that they should seek to know the will of the people. If an elected official believes that the expressed will of people happens to be WRONG, he has a unique opportunity to attempt to convince them of the wisdom of his approach and so change their view, but he has the obligation to represent them, not rule them.
Why don't cyclists use the paths? Because the paths don't lead where we want/need to go. Most of the paths are designed with the idea that the bicycle is for recreation; those of us who use it for transportation find them worse than useless.
Anonymous said...
Uncle Dennis, you said "government is elected to lead." No, they're elected to represent the people.,
Funny, you write like a Republican with arrogance but at the same time express Democrat values. Which is it buddy ?
Are you a flip flopper ? I am sure you voted Republican since I have yet to meet a Dem that is against progress. But yet you want leaders not rulers. Is BushCo a leadership ? I think not.
I'm responding to the poster who said to PLEASE LEAVE. I did. My taxes are 30% lower, the schools are better, I have a bigger, newer house and a much bigger yard. I don't have to worry about crime as much.
The downside? I have a longer commute when I need to go somewhere. Oh well, life is full of trade offs.
The other downside is watching the powers-that-be spend money like a drubnken sailor on a bloated, over-budget train that few will ride. Charlotte's own study ADMITS IOT WILL NOT LESSEN TRAFFIC CONGESTION. So why build it? To be considered 'world class'.
Yes, I hope those who think they are so elite continue to "move forward". have fun riding the train with the thugs and homeless! I'll enjoy the safety of my suburban community!
I've ridden the train for many years in NYC. Not a single problem. "Thugs", you truely are a wimp. A wimp Mamma's boy with nothing better to do than complain. If you moved then GREAT FOR YOU and us. So why troll this blog trying to start crap when it doesn't involve you anymore ? Can't wait until they put up a toll so it will snag your wimpy butt.
Train wont lessen traffic.
You people kill me. I've also seen posts on this blog that claim: "I've been to NYC and they still have major traffic so light rail doesn't work".
Okay, lets see, simple terms for simpletons. Where do you think all the people would be if they were not riding the train !?!?
That's right, on the road, sitting in traffic with you.
Boy , that takes some smarts to figure out.
AMAZING.
So you moved. How far away ? What are you saving $900 a year on taxes? If it's a $300k house than that's what you are saving at 30% less. At todays gas prices you are spending all of that savings on gas if you drive more than 15 miles each way to work and average 25 mpg. Not to mention that if you travel an extra 15 miles in Mecklenburg traffic you are probably spending another 45 minutes to an hour per day in your car (WORK).
So the only thing you have gained is a bigger house and yard.
But the trade off is that you are likely surrounded by simple minded folkswith simple beliefs. I find it pretty scary the further you go outside of any city.
But if that works for you then great. But why bother us ? You are not one of us anymore.
I don't think any of our elected officials can control growth, per se. Communities more "progressive" than Charlotte have attempted and failed to control growth. Huntersville has award winning plans, but how much growth has it controlled? The population has more than doubled in the last 10-15 years. The success is in altering how the growth looks and feels.
Both sides (the pure market philes and the govco planners) exaggerate the relative costs and benefits associated with their prescriptions. That being said, I have no problems with implementing stricter regulations on suburban form. Some surveys have found that some developers actually want to go beyond existing zoning regs in some contexts, but they are bound by archaic zoning ordinances that specify density.
Likewise, APFOs are a no-brainer. Does a bank lend you money if your income cannot support the payments? Of course not. The city should not allow development that fails to pay for itself in the present and future. Why should the costs of development be foisted onto the public? Just as the true capitalists demand that public transit pay for itself, I think we should demand that new subdivisions pay for themselves, complete with schools, road widenings, police/fire/ems etc.
The only example of outstanding growth control is Davidson. Unfortunately that town is a very unique case and cannot be replicated.
As long as there are economic opportuinites here, people are going to keep moving here in droves. We either plan accordingly or let the influx run roughshod over us. I woo, would prefer a completed, and widened I-485, but the cioty and county officials you are whining about can't do anything about it. It's the STATE that builds and maintains our freeways and Providence Rd. (NC 16...a STATE road). If light rail funding gets cut, no new money is going to go toward roads for Charlotte. It seems that many of you STILL don't get that.
As for government leaders, yes, they are elected to represent us AND make the hard decisions. If you don't like their decisions, you vote them out. Though it is by a small margin, the public officials I want representing me look like they are going to win.
Onward and upward.
Danimal
Laisse,
Is it really an impossible dream to control growth? Are you saying that the developer lobby won't allow cities to control growth through influence, etc?
Why can't Charlotte's city planners just say no to any further development? Theoretically couldn't the city council say that for the next five years, no new building permits will be approved within the city limits? Once our schools and highways catch up to the growth that we already have, then the city could decide to allow growth.
Is the problem that our elected officials don't have the intestinal fortitude to make that call? But logically, isn't that a viable option for elected officials? If we make the decision not to raise taxes, isn't a no growth policy the next logical step?
I would like city council to at least consider a no growth policy in certain areas where the infrastructure has not been able to keep up with the growth.
If we had a no growth policy, wouldn't that force developers to work within existing developments to improve what has already been built? Maybe the developers would begin to fix up some of the empty big box facilities that we are blessed with in some areas of Charlotte.
The money for I485 comes from entirely different funds(federal interstate highway funds and matching state money.) The money for light rail comes from the transit tax and matching federal funds. They can't mix.
If growth, and more importantly, controlled growth is stopped, a number of things would happen; existing housing prices would begin to rise rapidly, as Charlotte continues to add population without adding housing inventory. The eventual cost of housing would raise prices in all sectors of our economy, making Charlotte more expensive than other alternative cities. Major employers, concerned with high living costs begin to move jobs to other areas, both off shore and domestic. When this happens, the residential bubble that the chicken little press keeps crying about happens, and everyone loses.
Concerning transportation, there is no debate over oil being a non renewable resource, and that in some number of years, some say 30 - 50, the supply will be nearly gone. As in the above supply and demand example, prices will shoot up until the supply is all gone, and then, what? Could we build a rail system then?
My natural inclination is for governnment to stay out of most everything, but in this case, we are talking about the infrastructure that is critical to our continued success.
And to the debate over whether our leaders should lead or follow, I give you Bill James.
A few of you explained that it is state money for highways/485 and city/county for light rail via transit tax. We get that. It doesn't make it right.
If the McCrory, Helms and all the other local powers that be exerted 1/4 of the effort towards securing more funding from the state for highways as they did getting light rail (or any of their other pet projects like nascar halloffame, a baseball park, etc etc) we would have the money and 485 would be completed.
Local GovCo holds up their hands and says "sorry, we can't help - we're held hostage by Raleigh for funds for highways" - and that is complete BS. If they wanted it, they'd find a way to get it. Working on existing roads is NOT a priority for them, plain and simple.
Neither is the illegal immigration problem or the rapidlly risingh cimr & gang problem.
But hey, we're "world class" because we'll have bright shiny new toys downtown! Whooppee!
Frank, yes it's theoretically possible to control growth. Local government could implement a growth moratorium. However, the lawsuits would be flying fast and furiously. From what little I've read on the subject, moratoria are typically for less than 12-18 months--not enough time to catch up to growth and barely enough to make any major changes in policies. The issue of takings would arise as land owners would sue for economic loss associated with an inability to develop their private property for financial gain.
I think we need some type of capacity analysis that considers the cumulative impact of multiple developments on existing services (both public and private). APFOs might not be that successful if they only applied to large planned communities. It's the 20 rezonings with 50 houses that overload the system. We tend to focus on the Highland Creeks while ignoring all the other, smaller developments.
The private side of the equation addresses retail or commercial. For instance, is it prudent to allow HT or Wal-Mart to build new groceries wherever they deem fit? Sure, their analyses might indicate that they can succeed with four 60,000 sf facilities in a 3-mile radius. However, that might mean that the local Food Lion or Bi-Lo might go dark. From my perspective, existing zoning and planning tools promote inefficiency because they lead to too much retail chasing too few rooftops.
So, the system is broken on both the housing and services side.
It is not the governments job to control growth - but it is governments job to make sure that the money coming in is enough to cover the cost of services going out. If there is a shortfall, you can't keep hitting up the folks that are already here - you need to make those who benefit from the new schools, roads, etc. pay for them. Those who benefit from growth - new residents and the developers - need pay the piper and cough up the extra needed for roads, schools, parks and other services. We can't keep overburdening those of us already here. If that drives up prices so be it -- b/c it is also not the government's job to subsidize private devlopment and home ownership.
Rebecca, do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? If so, government is subsidizing your home ownership.
The mortage deduction is not a gift - it is allowing me to keep more of the money I EARNED from being confiscated by the government. The fact that this deduction is allowed only underscores how much more money is taken in by the government than is really needed. And my mortgage deduction does not come at the expense of other mortgage holders - unlike new Mecklenburg home owners who can afford a cheaper house in large part due to the draconian tax revaluations and increases suffered by homeowners who live in the city. I would be more than happy to forego all deductions in exchange for a flat, fair tax.
Laisse,
If it is determined to be feasible, I don't think the threat of potential lawsuits should deter us from doing what is right and correct. I'm sure the city/county would be on strong legal ground if the decision was made to restrict further development for a few years.
Rebecca,
Why do you say that controlling growth is not a valid role for government? The alternative is to have total unrestraint and allow a gentleman's club to locate next to a church with a used car lot nearby.
Why shouldn't the city make the conscious decision to stop new development but allow developers to improve or fix up existing buildings and facilities? Surely if demand goes up for housing or retail, developers will work with existing facilities over not doing any more business in Charlotte.
Surely this could be controlled to make sure that problems identified by Uncle Dennis don't happen.
At some point we as taxpayers have got to become tired of building new schools, new libraries, new waste treatment facilities, new police and fire stations, extending sewar lines when capacity exists in other parts of the city. I think its time for city council/county commisioners begin to look at the option of slowing growth down.
I vote for the following to control growth:
1) A $10,000 tax on all new uptown condos.
2) A 50% property tax hike to anyone living within 2 miles of an arena, an musuem, a light rail station, ImaginOn or any building with the words 'hall of fame' on them.
3) New new building permits issued in Mecklenburg county.
4) No buildings higher than 3 stories (since density overcrowds the schools, taps out the police and fire, and creates wear and tear on public works.
That's for starters.
I keep reading about all these new uptown condos, and I agree with Mary that we must put stop to this out of control growth.
All this talk about how light rail will help us in the future...well, what about now?
How much more prodcutive could we be (as a city & as individuals) if we didn't have to sit in traffic for 30+ minutes - many people 1 hour + daily - just to get to work?
What if more people embraced telecommuting?
Or what if the powers-that-be actual built enough roads to handle the capacity moving into this city?
What is our commute was easy? how much more exciting and world-class would this city be? If we could move easy around this city, wouldn't that be a draw for others considering relocation? Especially businesses...
While we're spending a billion plus to finance light-rail that will help us in 20 years, but won't help us today to alleviate the traffic issues, one has to wonder where our leaders priorities are. We could be a much better city if we worked to eliminate traffic today versus the 20-year solution.
Don't agree with me? Fine. You're entitled to your opinion as I am mine. Just don't post and say the 20-year light rail solution is the be-all and end-all. That may be your opinion, ut it sure isn't fact!
So what happens when this light rail line is built and the terrorists target it? They blow up 300 people commuting home from Uptown on a light-rail line and I guarantee NO ONE will ride a light rail line again.
Seems like this solution that many on here and Uptown are espousing is not perfect. Light-rail could be an easy target to hit many people at once, whereas people in cars are well dispersed.
It happened overseas and it could happen here.
"So what happens when this light rail line is built and the terrorists target it? They blow up 300 people commuting home from Uptown on a light-rail line and I guarantee NO ONE will ride a light rail line again.
Seems like this solution that many on here and Uptown are espousing is not perfect. Light-rail could be an easy target to hit many people at once, whereas people in cars are well dispersed.
It happened overseas and it could happen here."
And if that happens at a shopping mall, people will never go to a shopping mall again.
The Terrorists win, lets do as South Park (the TV Show) suggested, and bury our heads in the sand!
But that is not my point today.
Anyone in Uptown yesterday, November 13, got a view of Charlotte in the next 5 - 8 years; a core in gridlock.
You can wide all the roads you want (if you can find money to do so) but when all roads lead to Uptown, there is no relief.
Charlotte is growing rapidly as a residential location, and a spot for companies to relocate. This will continue, and we all will benefit from this growth, but to hanbdle it, we need alternatives to driving.
The seminar at Bobcat Arena was a prime example. There will be a major stop at the arena, and if 1/3 of the drivers who entered the city for that event would have taken light rail, they would have been deposited 100 feet from the entance, instead of stuck in their cars.
As an aside, most of the cars I saw in gridlock were occupied by a lone driver.
Not only can light rail move a large number of people smoothly and timely, but the destination does not need parking spaces for their cars while they are at their destination.
Light rail does not solve anything. The number of people even able to ride it are a rounding error. The train only serves 9 miles on South Blvd.
The federal funding doesn't work for any other area of Charlotte. Even the University line has a budget gap that is MUCH larger than reported by the Observer. If they are saying $700 million now, it will surely cost $1.5 billion before it is done.
Let's just admit that light rail will be limited to just the South Blvd line and start talking about the realistic options.
The realistic option, with or without rail, is gridlock. Show me ONE city, just one, where congestion was conquered by paving. Likewise with transit. NY, Chicago, DC, Boston all have terrible congestion. Both sides are guilty of promoting their sides as a cure for congestion.
There is no cure. Charlotte is not a hub and spoke city. The bulk of the people are moving suburb to suburb. Office parks are springing up along every exit of 485. Even Bank of America is leasing an entire building in Ballantyne so that their workers in south Charlotte can avoid the drive.
Those are the solutions. The banks and major employers should have offices closer to where the people live.
Telecommuting should be encouraged by everyone.
We need to sell 1/2 of the buses that CMS owns.
The fact is Charlotte is becoming a big city whether you like it or not. Whether you live and/or work in town or out in the suburbs, and no matter how wide our roads are or how comprehensive our public transportation system is, traffic and congestion is a way of life. the Pandora's Box was opened decades ago and the growth can't be stopped. On the brightside, the economic and cultural opportunites here are a hell of a lot better than they were way back when. There are plenty of cities out there who would love to have the problems we are having.
Just a thought. If the number of people riding these trains comes close to or exceeds the number projected, where are all the riders cars going to park? You will need large parking areas (hopefully with police patrolling the lot) or parking decks to accomodate all the riders, unless everyone is going to walk to the stops.
I just don't see people driving to a train station near Pineville, then parking their car, then waiting for a train to downtown.
That 485 exit at South Blvd is going to be a nightmare with traffic if that is the expectation of CATS.
I've parked in many suburban train stations in other cities. I'ts not that bad.
You need a multiple pronged strategy. First, jack up the prices for parking in Uptown to an uncomfortable level during the workday. Second, work with employers to provide transit passes to employees at discounted rates. Do not widen the interstates to increase capacity. The best incentive is the frustration of sitting in traffic.
They needed that line to go AT LEAST to the Mall. Then a HUGE parking deck built to hold all of the cars. It really needed to swing right onto the median of 485 and head all the way to Providence. Then people would ride for sure. It would be to convenient not to ride it. Now for some people you are halfway to work by the time you hit the train station. Pineville ought to be ashamed of themselves for stopping the train from going by. What do they think they are protecting ? It's a trashy old mill town that is now filled with fast food, gas stations and car dealerships. Hell, I live uptown and I and many others I know would skip going to South Park and hop the train to Carolina Place instead. But I am not going to ride it to the end of the line and then hail a cab (if there was ever one to be found way out there) just to get to the mall.
The train is a good idea but TERRIBLE planning.
"not that bad" is all anyone can come up with for the "parking problem for riders"? For the amount of money spent, I would expect nothing short of magnificance for anything.
"You need a multiple pronged strategy. First, jack up the prices for parking in Uptown to an uncomfortable level during the workday. Second, work with employers to provide transit passes to employees at discounted rates. Do not widen the interstates to increase capacity. The best incentive is the frustration of sitting in traffic."
This has to be one of the more hilarious bits of communistic commentary posted here in a long time.
Why not just ban cars???
If you are too stupid to ride and rather sit in traffic then it's your right....as a jackass.
Enjoy yourself.
I'll be reading a book, the paper or getting a head start on work so I can get home early.
That's right, I 'll be home way before you. With the rate Charlotte is growing your 45 minute commutes will be an hour and a half within 5 years.
Like I said "enjoy".
I sat through all 49 listed speakers at last night's MTC meeting. All of the comments on this board about traffic congestion, pollution, and parking are way off the mark. If you listened to the speakers last night, you would know without a doubt that rail has absolutely nothing to do with any of those things.
90% or more of the speakers spoke strictly about development. They ranged from panicked professional developers who were worried about losing their speculative land investments, to yuppies who thought they'd make a quick buck by purchasing a house near the streetcar in NODA or Plaza Midwood. To be fair, there were also some long-time residents near Eastland Mall and from the Beaties Ford road area who sounded sincerely desperate for development to save their dying neighborhoods - but who's fault is that and why should federal taxes pay for it?
It was also sad to see at least one speaker play the race card in trying to get the street car project bumped to the top. I believe his quote was "rich white people get the trains, while poor black people get busses." I guess he hasn't heard that University City on the Northeast line is the most diverse part of the city and getting more diverse every year.
For the record, I stand to gain personally from both the Northeast and North lines if they are built. That doesn't mean I am willing to line developers' pockets at taxpayer expense.
Good comments, Rick.
As John Locke wannabe who said: "This has to be one of the more hilarious bits of communistic commentary posted here in a long time."
It's not communism. It's capitalism. It's all about incentives. You want people to drive more hybrids? Give them tax breaks. You want people to buy houses? Give mortgage tax write-offs. Want people to ride transit? make driving expensive and frustrating.
Anonymous said: "Want people to ride transit? make driving expensive and frustrating."
In what way is that capitalism?
Wouldn't it make more sense to say if you want people to ride transit, make it convenient and cheap amd competitive with driving?
How would you "make" driving expensive and frustrating?
My previous "communism" point may have been a bit over-the-top...but deliberately not improving roads and deliberately making driving expensive and frustrating is a way beyond controlling growth...
Rick, of course, made great points.
Above all, the rail transit is above investors getting a return on the development...NOT about people riding the rail.
Its about choice...and most people choose to drive even when they have the option of a bus or train.
Regardless of how the county commission election ultimately turns out today when all of the votes are finally counted, I think we are in for a very contentious year here in the Great State of Mecklenburg.
Once again, Transit and Schools will be issues on the forefront of everyone's mind.
If Parks Helms stays in office, we are guaranteed another bloated and misprioritized school bond package on next year's ballot.
If Kaye McGarry comes from behind and bumps off the Dear Leader, we may get a more reasonable School Bond package. It will still be huge, and it will still cause taxes to go up. However, it may at least address some problems.
Look for the half-cent transit tax to be on the ballot either way.
If we get more of the same from our County Commission, then expect a petition drive to give the people a choice. It only takes 50K signatures to do this, and in the age of the internet, that should be easy to get.
If we get change, then expect the county to put the transit tax back on the ballot, but to redirect the money to more useful projects.
Either way, I look forward to the challenge.
I wonder what happens to these ballot initiatives if the following very realistic scenario plays out over the next 12 months...
The South Corridor misses it's opening date.
Projections for the Northeast LRT line top $1 billion.
The School Board and it's rubber stamp County Commission put a $500 million dollar misprioritized bond package on the ballot.
Schools continue to get very poor test scores with dozens of felons continuing to roam the halls.
Gang problems continue to grow.
The county pushes ahead with Uptown baseball in the face of lawsuits pointing out that previous bond referendums for park funds specifically prohibited such a stadium - creating another "arena" situation.
There is a populist, voter driven petition on the ballot to eliminate or redirect transit funds in the face of all the waste.
What do you think happens?
Rick,
Even if the petition gets on the ballot and passes, isn't there a way for the County Commission and School Board to get their money anyway?
Didn't that happen this last time with $120 million ( or so ) being given to CMS without voter approval?
Maybe we'll have to see if Helms is out first...
Fed Up,
Sure, but remember, Norman Mitchell has said he won't vote for COPS, so his vote plus the 4 republican commissioners, actually gives the republicans the leverage needed to reduce expenditures on lower priority projects.
That's what happened with this last round of COPS. (We need schools, just not waste.)
Of course Norman probably won't make that mistake again.
Thanks Rick...
We can only hope...
I know for a fact that the light rail repeal people have the ability to get 48,000 signatures. There is some big money behind that effort.
Post a Comment