after tonight (Austin, Post, Campbell: appointed, house, tenant)

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by LittleCityATX

Ok, I could have been nicer, but I read his tone as self-aggrandizing rhetoric (look at how amazing I am, I love trees and puppies while you love tract-homes and polluting trucks) which is extremely irritating when his straw-man response had nothing to do with my point.

The naivete that accompanies the typical "I'm against government spending!" argument can be equally irritating.

But hey, JayBrown pegged my response pretty good. And I'm finding I like being nice, so I will leave it at that. One snarky sentence is enough for me right now

[austinnerd]

Originally Posted by atxcio

And you have to admit, it IS a little humorous that you chose to argue the wisdom of a bond package for sidewalks and trails with examples of pickup trucks and tract housing. I don't think I could have come up with more dissimilar examples than those.

I can understand LittleCityATX's point, it's a new bond, the city will have to repay with new tax payer dollars (assuming you don't believe that it can be paid back by existing taxes), dollars that, had the city not taken it, could have been used by the private sector to invest in the manufacture of those other things. I'm not making a judgement call on the statement, simply saying that from a logical standpoint it makes complete sense.

That said, I do agree with atxcio in that given a system in which waste is an integral part, one measure of "success" is how useful something eventually ends up being even if the cost to get that thing is higher than what it could/should have been.

[verybadgnome]

Here's a good reason why we should spend the money versus other cities looking at the same type of projects:

"All three major U.S. financial rating agencies have reaffirmed Austin’s ‘AAA’ long-term rating, the highest attainable bond rating that a city can achieve. Also, the rating agencies reaffirmed the stable outlook on the City of Austin’s existing general obligation debt. The rating affects approximately $890.6 million of the City’s outstanding tax-supported debt. The rating agencies also assigned the ‘AAA’ long-term rating to the City’s 2010 public improvement bonds being offered for sale on Thursday, August 26, 2010.
Standard and Poor’s report noted that key factors supporting the ‘AAA’ rating included Austin’s strong and diverse economic base, strong financial management and moderate overall debt levels. S&P further cited Austin’s financial management as "strong", indicating sound practices that are well embedded and likely sustainable. Fitch Ratings noted that one of the key factors driving affirmation of the AAA rating was the City’s experienced management team and its sound fiscal and budgetary practices. Moody’s Investors Services described Austin’s financial policies, expenditure controls and conservative budget assumptions as "credit positives".

CapMetro may be irresponsible with their money but COA is not.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by austinnerd

I can understand LittleCityATX's point, it's a new bond, the city will have to repay with new tax payer dollars (assuming you don't believe that it can be paid back by existing taxes), dollars that, had the city not taken it, could have been used by the private sector to invest in the manufacture of those other things. I'm not making a judgement call on the statement, simply saying that from a logical standpoint it makes complete sense.

My understanding was that it would be paid back by city sales tax revenues, which makes it a bit more palatable to me. At least people will have somewhat of a choice in the matter (beyond the election), if they don't like the stuff the bonds pay for they can cut down on their non-essential spending. Or shop outside the city, like the RoT Rally people supposedly did this year because of the City's boycott of Arizona.

[RevMen]

Originally Posted by atxcio

My understanding was that it would be paid back by city sales tax revenues, which makes it a bit more palatable to me. At least people will have somewhat of a choice in the matter (beyond the election), if they don't like the stuff the bonds pay for they can cut down on their non-essential spending. Or shop outside the city, like the RoT Rally people supposedly did this year because of the City's boycott of Arizona.

Property taxes.

Financial and Tax Impact
The $90 million included in Proposition One would be funded by
General Obligation Bonds, which are repaid by property taxes. If
approved, the City plans on issuing the bonds beginning in August
2011. Debt service on these bonds is expected to be funded
within the current tax rate — no increase in the property tax rate
is anticipated.

[mickey65]

Originally Posted by Austin97

Maybe only two since he almost certainly will run for president.

Even after he swore up and down that he had no interest in it...

[riaelise]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

I'm glad it passed. As an alternative one of the projects highly rated was to make SH 71 at FM 973 an overpass. This would have taken up over half the $90M and done nothing for Austinites. The main benefit would be to people who live in Travis County unincorporated areas and Bastrop by cutting a minute or two off their commute into Austin. Why should Austinites vote to help promote quicker commutes for those that choose to live in sprawl areas beyond the city limits? The same exact argument could be made against FM 1626 in that it does nothing but promote people living farther and farther away from their workplace so they can get country living with a city job. Not on my dime.

Creedmoor_Mom: The sales tax you pay in Austin is a pittance compared to the property taxes that I pay. I don't think you would want to trade me.

Frankly, as a commuter I don't care one way or another. I've commuted since I've worn diapers. But I don't think your property taxes are that far off from what many of us "sprawlies" are paying out here..

Let's all just get used to the fact that every city, at least major one, has suburbs and that doesn't mean that we should still be having horse and buggy dirt paved roads.

[LittleCityATX]

I didn't say that I was against all government spending.

My main point was that we're spending a lot for very little in return. My lesser point was that we're borrowing to do it which is irresponsible.

Are you aware that the total budget for Austin is about 2.8 billion per year of which we appear to spend 128 million per year just to service the current debt? (The 2011 budget seem to imply a much higher debt service load, but their numbers don't add up to me.)

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by RevMen

Property taxes.

That indeed seems correct.

Remind me to never trust talk radio for news. From: Austin Local News - Austin voters face $90M question today

"Proposition 1 is within the bonding capacity with the city of Austin. It will be paid with existing sales tax, so it won't increase people's taxes," Joanna Wolaver, chair of the Get Austin Moving campaign tells KLBJ.

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by riaelise

Frankly, as a commuter I don't care one way or another. I've commuted since I've worn diapers. But I don't think your property taxes are that far off from what many of us "sprawlies" are paying out here..

Let's all just get used to the fact that every city, at least major one, has suburbs and that doesn't mean that we should still be having horse and buggy dirt paved roads.

Looking at TCAD the big distinction between Travis County and COA people is the line:

CITY OF AUSTIN 0.457100

Travis Co people aren't subject to this but COA owners are. On a $200,000 homes that is about $900/year.

But since these bonds are paid through sales taxes it's another story. Yes you may pay sales taxes in Austin but Austinites also spend money and pay sales taxes throughout the region, at the outlet malls, Cabela's, Ikea, etc. I'm just saying it works both ways and that I would have a hard time imagine Austinites clamoring for a project bordering another city, much less the people of that city being in favor of it.

Hey if you want roads in the outlying areas what is stopping Travis County issuing their own bonds for projects? Williamson County is doing this en masse.

Also for a little perspective I would think in the horse and buggy days most people who lived in outlying areas were farmers who didn't have to commute into town 5 days a week. Our lack of land use planning is making for a very inefficient system in an increasingly unsustainable region.