Why are light rail and new roads combined in bond proposal? (Austin: taxes, to live)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by petro

Wiley has zero chance of winning, but yeah, he's against rail. He also wants to repeal the bag ban, get rid of Austin's bike sharing program, cut programs for the homeless, and remove environmental reviews for new road construction.

He's not running to be your council member. He's running in the most Republican district of the ten - highest % opposition to housing bonds in both 2012 and 2013.

All those bugs to you, look like features to his voters.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Oh, and BTW - running urban rail down MOPAC - another really bad idea.

Not Urban Rail, but maybe commuter rail...

Lone Star Regional Rail Project

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by atxcio

It's a community college campus. Barely.

Rackspace is already moving, so it's already more than "a community college campus".

Originally Posted by atxcio

Plans are great -- Intel planned a building downtown,

Which is now a massive courthouse. Not exactly good evidence for your assertion that Highland is going to remain barren and empty forever.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

The ends is misrepresented and certainly doesn't justify the "means" of government use of unconstitutional ballots

Okay, I'll bite. what " unconstitutional ballots" are you referring to?

[Reggieray]

Originally Posted by petro

Wiley has zero chance of winning, but yeah, he's against rail. He also wants to repeal the bag ban, get rid of Austin's bike sharing program, cut programs for the homeless, and remove environmental reviews for new road construction.

Holy cow. Finally a candidate that gets it. He'd have my vote.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by jb9152

Not Urban Rail, but maybe commuter rail...

Lone Star Regional Rail Project

Two different animals.

Urban rail on Mooac would be an utter failure.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Reggieray

Holy cow. Finally a candidate that gets it. He'd have my vote.

same here. Im pretty sure in district 10 you could get elected just on eliminating all the government overreach that the council has passed in the last year.

1) eliminate bag ban
2) eliminate affordable housing initiative
3) improve commute times with road expansion (no rail)
4) eliminate mandatory accessibility improvements for new housing
5) open up balcones canyonland preserve to community use (hiking/biking) - 30,000 acres of park land
etc

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by Austin97

same here. Im pretty sure in district 10 you could get elected just on eliminating all the government overreach that the council has passed in the last year.

1) eliminate bag ban
2) eliminate affordable housing initiative
3) improve commute times with road expansion (no rail)
4) eliminate mandatory accessibility improvements for new housing
5) open up balcones canyonland preserve to community use (hiking/biking) - 30,000 acres of park land
etc

Kinda goes to show you how unserious people can get elected based on sentiment alone.

1. A minor annoyance, about number 83 on the list of important issues the city is facing.
2. This is chump change - won't impact taxes at all.
3. We've expanded and expanded and expanded roads everywhere - hasn't worked yet, will never work - oh, and it's very very very expensive.
4. Program can be tweaked to work very well -no need to eliminate it.
5. Not even a city issue at all.

In the meant time, someone with this platform hasn't informed anyone about all the really critical items or deal with the major budgetary issues at all. Scary.

10-1 folks - it's a slow-moving train-wreck.

[Trainwreck20]

I don't really see any difference between the (purported) make-up of the future council and the current. Yes, item 1 is minor, but why was it even bothered with in the first place? The current council took a non-issue and made an issue out of it. Also no. 4 - why is this a council issue? Like you said, there are really critical items to deal with. And Item 2 is not about the cost, it is about a bond issue being voted down and the council deciding to do an end-run as best they can. That 'chump change' argument is not even relevant, it is the process.

So, while I kind of agree with your response to most of the items, they apply to the current council as well as the 10-1 council....

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

Yes, item 1 is minor, but why was it even bothered with in the first place? The current council took a non-issue and made an issue out of it. Also no. 4 - why is this a council issue? Like you said, there are really critical items to deal with.

There's a difference between dealing with minutia as part of the job and making it the major part of your platform for election. There's all sorts of minor stuff the council does (and has to bother with, if all "minor" things were completely ignored it becomes major).