Opinions On Proposition 104 (Phoenix, Tucson, Maricopa: sale, lawyers, bankrupt)

[locolife]

Originally Posted by dvxhd

Isn't that what the plan already is? Except farther west than you mentioned?



Valley Metro even says on their website:

Now that a preferred route and transit mode have been identified and approved, the Project will enter the environmental assessment phase which is a detailed analysis of how light rail would operate along the route. Early design work, including identifying station locations, is also expected to begin during this phase. Valley Metro and the City of Phoenix will continue to solicit community input as the project moves through the next phases. - See more at: Providing Public Transportation Alternatives for the Greater Phoenix Metro Area | Valley Metro | Project Detai

Exactly!

[locolife]

Originally Posted by Voebe

Much of being a good citizen is understanding the value of something, even if you don't happen to be using it at the moment - like, say, public transit, a decent school system, etc.

It's not all about what's useful to you personally.

Perfectly said!

[Voebe]

Originally Posted by Java Jolt

Very well-written.

It's the same attitude these people with ultraconservative mindsets have about nearly anything involving public funding, I don't use it so I shouldn't have to chip in and help pay for it.

Opponents of this proposition are only thinking of the short-term cost savings by voting against it but improved public transit will still be needed in the future, and by that time it will be even more expensive which will call for even higher taxes.

I fear that much in Phoenix is regarded only in the short term. That's why there hasn't been, overall, much thought about a host of other things, that have led to problems with changing the local ecology. People seem more interested in "growth" - which just means making money.

[R_Cowgirl]

For just a moment realize, this bill is NOT just about Light Rail and whether or not we need it. It's about a TAX INCREASE that will last 35 YEARS. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

We pay sales tax on our gas purchases already for upkeep of our infrastructure. As many of us who have lived in cities with poor roads and really ugly traffic have pointed out, it ain't so bad here in Phoenix. Yes, traffic in 2 or 3 sectors really sucks at drive time. Go to many of the older cities around the US and try driving at any time of day and you'll find the same gridlock we have for a couple of hours each day.

But that's not my point...
Before you defend this bill (which I suspect is being promoted and pushed by a very wealthy lobby of people who will benefit greatly from all the contracts that will ensue)

- From March through May MovePhx had received $400,000 to pass this $31.5 billion tax increase. June, July and august contributions are not yet listed.

Two good points from the article that should raise your eyebrows:

- Why are Out of State Groups supporting Light Rail? Does McCarthy Building Company, St. Louis, MO plan to profit from Prop 104?
- The Arizona Chapter Associated General Contractors of America, Phoenix supports Prop 104, and its members hope to be awarded $billions in new contracts.

At least take the time to click on this link that explains better than I can why I will vote NO. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

Quotes from the page with some very good questions - including the weasel words in the first line... "may be..." is a dangerous phrase in any Bill and all of us who wind up footing the cost should think long and hard before allowing that much leeway. Even if you support increasing monies for transportation - this is NOT the Bill you want to support. Here's why:

- Prop 104 is a $31.5 billion sales tax that 'may be used for activities including the following' over the next 35 years. That means May or May Not be used for those activities listed and others not listed.
- Prop 104 construction of shade structures at all bus stops is great for a wish list, but at what cost?
- Prop 104 will put WiFi on all buses and trains. This would be very expensive to install and would require constant fine tuning and maintenance of the thousands of devices needed to make this work, as well as replacing equipment to keep up with ever changing industry standards.
- A plus is that the Prop 104 WiFi would be helpful to law enforcement because it would track riders and their devices, as well as the sites they visit.
- Ridership and revenues meant to help pay for light rail are now $1 billion less than original committee predictions.
- Only 1% of Phoenicians actually use light rail.
- Light rail now has a $3.5 billion deficit. Will more light rail mean more deficit?
- $31.5 billion dollars in taxes is a lot of money that could been used for a lot of things. Like funding better education.

Tax and spend, tax and spend. Politicians are like alcoholics who can never get enough. If we pass Prop 104, it won't be the LAST tax increase. They will run out of this money and come back with hat in hand in the 2016 election. You just watch.

[Gus Smith]

All the me, me, me self-interested only are usually the most out-spokern as their interest comes first, don't you know. Maybe they could grasp the concept that better light rial and bus service would make the roads less congested.

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by Gus Smith

All the me, me, me self-interested only are usually the most out-spokern as their interest comes first, don't you know. Maybe they could grasp the concept that better light rial and bus service would make the roads less congested.

Not only that but busses and light rail give people alternatives besides just driving.

Owning and maintaining a car can be very expensive, not only with payments and insurance but general upkeep. Tires, hoses, and batteries wear out in faster here because of the heat.

Most people drive but there are some people who can't afford payments or upkeep on a car. What are they supposed to do, stay home?

[locolife]

Originally Posted by R_Cowgirl

For just a moment realize, this bill is NOT just about Light Rail and whether or not we need it. It's about a TAX INCREASE that will last 35 YEARS. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

We pay sales tax on our gas purchases already for upkeep of our infrastructure. As many of us who have lived in cities with poor roads and really ugly traffic have pointed out, it ain't so bad here in Phoenix. Yes, traffic in 2 or 3 sectors really sucks at drive time. Go to many of the older cities around the US and try driving at any time of day and you'll find the same gridlock we have for a couple of hours each day.

But that's not my point...
Before you defend this bill (which I suspect is being promoted and pushed by a very wealthy lobby of people who will benefit greatly from all the contracts that will ensue) Two good points from the article that should raise your eyebrows:
At least take the time to click on this link that explains better than I can why I will vote NO. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

I find it ironic that the opposition group are calling themselves taken for a ride, this was after all the great movie put together about how the motor vehicle companies heavily lobbied congress to ensure that freeways and roadways were the way of future growth patterns in America. They spent a fortune ensuring that every American city had nearly all of their rail infrastructure taken out. Very ironic name.

Otherwise there aren't very good arguments made in here regarding why one should vote against Prop 104.

Why are out of state companies supporting it? Of course because they plan to build it, you don't think the same groups lobbied for the freeway tax votes when we had those? Of course they did, they're contractors, there for anything that will result in more things being built.

What happens to the gas tax? Nothing, it continues to dwindle, as it's never been properly adjusted for inflation nor improved gas mileage, so guess what? America's infrastructure continues to crumble as funds dry up, sounds like freeways are just as, if not more, unsustainable then the LRT. Maybe we should start digging into how underfunded our roads are? That would be an interesting study.

[new2colo]

Originally Posted by R_Cowgirl

For just a moment realize, this bill is NOT just about Light Rail and whether or not we need it. It's about a TAX INCREASE that will last 35 YEARS. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

We pay sales tax on our gas purchases already for upkeep of our infrastructure. As many of us who have lived in cities with poor roads and really ugly traffic have pointed out, it ain't so bad here in Phoenix. Yes, traffic in 2 or 3 sectors really sucks at drive time. Go to many of the older cities around the US and try driving at any time of day and you'll find the same gridlock we have for a couple of hours each day.

But that's not my point...
Before you defend this bill (which I suspect is being promoted and pushed by a very wealthy lobby of people who will benefit greatly from all the contracts that will ensue) Two good points from the article that should raise your eyebrows:
At least take the time to click on this link that explains better than I can why I will vote NO. Phoenix Prop 104 - OnwardAZ.org

Quotes from the page with some very good questions - including the weasel words in the first line... "may be..." is a dangerous phrase in any Bill and all of us who wind up footing the cost should think long and hard before allowing that much leeway. Even if you support increasing monies for transportation - this is NOT the Bill you want to support. Here's why:

Tax and spend, tax and spend. Politicians are like alcoholics who can never get enough. If we pass Prop 104, it won't be the LAST tax increase. They will run out of this money and come back with hat in hand in the 2016 election. You just watch.

If we continue to defer transportation maintenance, things won't look so good in 35 years. You can already see the rubberized asphalt on the freeways that has worn down because of deferred maintenance. I don't want to see this city with 35 years worth of deferred maintenance while other cities are moving forward. You get what you pay for. If you want to pay nothing, we'll get nothing.

[stasi_crystals]

If it means making the city more walkable and urban, then I vote yes. However I wish the original ValTrans had passed in '89 (before I was born). Which of you Gen X'ers voted no on that one?

[locolife]

Originally Posted by stasi_crystals

If it means making the city more walkable and urban, then I vote yes. However I wish the original ValTrans had passed in '89 (before I was born). Which of you Gen X'ers voted no on that one?

Not I, but totally agree with you. I was in elementary in 89.... Wish it would have passed back then and I'm all for this thing passing now. Too much sprawl, too much time has already passed, if it was up to me I'd make this bill even larger and throw the tracks and other urban amenities in quicker.