Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In principle, I support light rail and other forms of public transit. I'm opposed to 104 mainly because we already are paying taxes for extending light rail, and that was the result of the Prop 400 approval by voters in 2004 to extend the half cent transportation tax ... a portion of that is supposed to be used for light rail. If Prop 104 passes, it will be the double taxation.
Another problem I have with this (as well as other transportation initiatives in the past) is the uncertainty of how much will actually get done with all this extra money. A good example of that was the 1985 half cent tax to build freeways. ADOT and MAG promised us 231 miles of new freeways by the early 21st Century, but we have only half of that completed. In 2004, voters approved the extension of that same tax for additional freeways, and light rail. How many new freeways have been built in the last 11 years from that tax extension??? Before anybody mentions the 303, that was already part of the 1985 plan. We constantly hear excuses that things can't be done as promised because of revenue shortfalls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef
The double taxation you refer to is not something that would be new if 104 is approved. It already exists. Currently, transit in Phoenix is funded by both Transit 2000, the .4% tax approved by Phoenix voters in 2000, and Proposition 400, the .5% tax approved by Maricopa County voters in 2004. What 104 proposes, and I support, is extending Transit 2000 past its 2020 sunset and raising the rate from .4% to .7%. Transportation projects and services are almost always financed by multiple layers of local, regional, and federal funds.
This is what I've said in several earlier posts. The taxes just keep sneaking up on us. One after another. We are told, "This tax will solve all these problems..." Then a few years later when the voting public has forgotten, we get yet another tax and another and another.
None of my objections are about Light Rail, or increased bus service, or bus shelters or fixing the roads. MY OBJECTION to Proposition 104 is what many have said. It is poorly worded. It has too many weasel words. It doesn't spell out what the plans are. It doesn't say how this is different from the previous 5 or more bills that were supposed to solve this problem. It doesn't explain what these out of state construction companies are doing --- are they planning on buying Metro Center and turning it into Condos? What's up with THAT LR extension?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant
The election booklet came in the mail yesterday. I am reading the ballot language for Prop 104 and see the following in the description:
"The revenues raised may be spent for activities including the following..."
If money is to be raised to expand light rail, bus routes and other transportation needs why not use the word "will" as opposed to "may". Sounds like a political bait and switch con. We're going to use this money for transportation needs....until something else pops up.
It's my understanding that prop 104 fine print says the city can use it for anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by new2colo
I went to a 104 debate last night with Councilwoman Gallego and Randal O'Toole from the Cato Institute hosted by Braham Resnick from KPNX. I am now voting against the proposition. What's changed? I'm not generally an anti-tax person because I do realize that you get what you pay for. If you don't give anything, you won't get anything. However, it's not clear what Phoenix residents overall stand to benefit if the tax is approved. Gallego fumbled when asked a basic question whether passage of the tax would change the construction schedule of the light rail, bus and street improvements throughout the city. The next light rail extension is proposed to open in 2034. She gave no hint that the 2034 date would be fast tracked with the passage of this tax. Additionally, the city seems hellbent on trying to extend they light rail to Metrocenter as if it is some hub of activity. Metrocenter is an incredibly dumpy mall on its last legs, surrounded by a bunch of auto oriented businesses. Light rail is not going to change that. Sure, Metrocenter will get a new Walmart next year, but that doesn't mean that area is coming back. In fact, I would argue that shows how far Metrocenter has fallen. We don't need a light rail connecting passengers to a Walmart. For the cost, it's just silly.
There was little conversation on any of the other purposes of this tax increase. Obviously all $31 billion is not going to be dumped into light rail, so discussing some of the other improvements that would presumably be funded would have been nice too. Other autocentric cities around the country who have been asked to pass local or regional transportation tax increases did so knowing that the respective referendums were not transit only. There is a core group of people who are clearly extreme transit advocates and would like to see Phoenix take on a more Portland style or European style outlook to transit. With the way Phoenix is spread out, that type of transit system will not work here.
The city needs to stop placing so much emphasis on light rail and present a listing of projects that would be funded by this tax. The city also needs to have some serious conversations with other jurisdictions about a commuter rail system. Sure, commuter rail might not be a viable means of transport on 2015, but between planning studies, finding a way to fund such a system, and right of way acquisition, it would likely take a decade or two before any dirt started moving.
Mr. O'Toole advocates for enhanced bus operations and privatizing the bus system. He also introduced the idea that driverless cars and Uber/Lyft are current or soon to be options available for people who do not have personal vehicles. While I don't agree with privatizing transportation nor that driverless cars and Uber/Lyft are common sense alternatives, I do believe that bus is the best way to serve the most people here for a comparatively minimal cost. If we poured the money that we want to spend for light rail into this service, we could actually have a really strong system. Light rail is shiny and new, but it doesn't meet the needs of most in Phoenix.
In any case, this truly does sound like a poorly thought out, rushed plan. There are too many people who are trying to get Phoenix to play "catch up" with cities that were designed before the automobile really took over. They look at other cities like Austin, Denver, Salt Lake, Portland, and LA and claim that we have to be like them. I think we need to take a look at the city we have today and how to best move it forward in the future. Just randomly and carelessly trying things and hoping that they will stick (light rail) is just a terrible way to use taxpayer money. One more vote against 104.
This deserves to be brought forward again. This says a lot about why many of us are skeptical. Thanks again
Quote:
Originally Posted by new2colo
I think my overall takeaway from the debate is that this is a rushed, poorly thought out proposition. It's intentions are in the right place, but it was put together sloppily. When you have city leaders who don't even know the details of what they're asking voters to approve, it doesn't instill any trust and confidence that the city can or will follow through.
I completely agree that all 21 or 22 Valley mayors need to sit down and have a serious conversation about commuter rail. It is the most viable form of public transportation in the Valley, next to an enhanced bus system. A good commuter rail system could actually have a meaningful impact on traffic as it builds up on metro Phoenix freeways over the next couple of decades. There is no money and seemingly no will for anyone to introduce a topic. All the focus is on this light rail, which chugs along at 35-45 MPH and stops at red lights.
Yes yes yes. We need to stop behaving as if Phoenix proper is a city sitting out in the middle of the desert by itself without other cities around it. We DO need to do something, Prop 104 aint it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondurant
The ballot language is highly suspect. Adding "may" regarding the generated revenue allocation to public transport is political trickery. Stanton and Co. are admitting with this language that portions will be distributed elsewhere. I'm left wondering if Prop 104 is also a backup plan to make up for the pension crisis. When the money is moved Stanton will refer agitated voters to the ballot language and say the people approved.
Phoenix is a large metropolitan area that is deserving of a sophisticated public transportation system. This will enable the city to acquire more company and professionals. It also relieves congestion on our streets. Honestly, I'm a bit shocked that some people would even have the temerity to protest something like this. I think for some people, they should strongly consider moving to a less populated more rural area. Phoenix has changed. It's no longer a small to medium sized city that you may have been accustomed to. It's never going to go back to being that type of city.
The right wing residents astonish me. They complain about the lack of jobs but don't want to invest in the type of things that attract jobs and companies. Look guys, CEO's and other executives of Fortune 500 companies are not really attracted by guns, anti-immigrant sentiment, anti-LGBT sentiment, lack of investment in public education and public transportation. Sorry but these executives don't resemble your idol Ted Nugent.
Oh Dear God, how DARE we have the temerity to have a debate on a Proposition that will have an effect on our population base for the next 20+ years! We should just sit down and do as we are told, is that how it works?
Give it a break AZRiverfan. First of all - a LOT of the opposition to Prop 104 is coming from the Left. https://smartgrowthusa.wordpress.com...-smart-growth/ primarily because it's several very big construction companies out of Missouri who are planning on building high density condos and apartments along the light rail path and are hoping to clear millions annually. Why else would they pour so much money into our local proposition?
And, did you read any of the very thoughtful responses on this? The city council can't answer questions about the bill. The bill has weasel language and no accountability. The bill is piling on top of several other similar bills in the past. The city is a mess since Stanton took over and many suspect this tax increase will help cover his tracks. This is not about "right wing residents" and very few conservatives would consider nugent an idol.
This is a real reason to buy into something like a rail.
I mentioned earlier in the thread about Tucson's investment of 200 mil into their streetcar, it has netted close to 1 billion dollars in investment in DT Tucson in just over 1 year. For those that think it's a waste of money, it's not really about the Light Rail itself, it's about what the Light Rail does for the city. An investment that can pay large dividends when done properly. IMO the only reason to vote against this measure is by disagreeing with the proposed route (it's pretty suspect). But Rail is a good thing for a city when done properly. I'd contend that we should run a route down East Camelback by the highrises over there, to the Scottsdale Fashion square then down Scottsdale rd to connect it to Tempe. This would be a heavily used route (but I doubt Scottsdale will ever get on board despite their traffic woes).
Ahh - there it is. The lie about $8 billion in new development. I was wondering when that would crop up. Here's the truth about that new development. First of all - two of those projects that were built near the Light rail had nothing to do with the light rail. They were a school and the expansion of the Phoenix convention center. Both were planned long before Light rail and proximity does not infer cause. Second, the balance of the billions in development were in the planning stage before the financial crash of 2008 and are still in the planning stage. They have never been built. This, again, is part of my concern with the marketing of this proposition. Why are they misinforming the public? Again and again - Cui Bono? Who benefits from this? The left leaning smart growth blog above gives this link Construction, transit groups fund Phoenix Prop. 104 transit tax campaign
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64
This is entirely anectodal and without any facts other than what your (I'm assuming anti 104 friends believe).
I have never seen the level of development DT Phx is receiving at this time, is that a result of the Rail? Maybe it's certainly a catalyst, and its also a centerpiece to develop around. What I gave was an article from the Phoenix Business Journal which might have a few better resources than what "people who live and work down there" know. I live and work 'down there' myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjseliga
That's how those Republicans roll, you know how much they love voter fraud. Probably stole some Phoenician's ballot!
This is not about politics, and there are many Democrats who don't support this bill. Take time to read the links and study some of the very articulate and coherent posts here.
Just because many of us question the language, the intent and the sponsors of Proposition 104 doesn't make us anti-growth, anti-planned growth or anti-light rail (or any other kind of transportation improvement.) It simply says that many of us who are opposed did our homework, read the bill and found it lacking. If this is such a good idea, we have another year before the election to work out the kinks in this bill and they can propose it again. Till I see more accountability and less weaseling - It's a NO for me.
Whatever you do, make sure you vote before Tuesday. You have several places and several ways to do that: look it up here: Voting Centers Address
This is not about politics, and there are many Democrats who don't support this bill. Take time to read the links and study some of the very articulate and coherent posts here.
Just because many of us question the language, the intent and the sponsors of Proposition 104 doesn't make us anti-growth, anti-planned growth or anti-light rail (or any other kind of transportation improvement.) It simply says that many of us who are opposed did our homework, read the bill and found it lacking. If this is such a good idea, we have another year before the election to work out the kinks in this bill and they can propose it again. Till I see more accountability and less weaseling - It's a NO for me.
Whatever you do, make sure you vote before Tuesday. You have several places and several ways to do that: look it up here: Voting Centers Address
The problem with your argument is that this argument could be made for any major development project in any city. You cannot project with 100% accuracy what numbers will be produced and if you did, it would likely forecast weak numbers. The point you are missing is that major infrastructure projects require a lot of money and you will not see immediate gains. The benefit of these projects will not be felt for decades and will really impact our children and grandchildren. In other large metropolitan areas, they understand this and green light these projects. But in Phoenix, we have still have this Farmer Brown's small town mentality and nit pick every project that would be considered common sense in any other major metropolitan area. Light rail alone will not create jobs but it's a combination of light rail, increased number companies, improved schools etc that will improve our economy. For you to feel like you are so enlightened because you examined light rail alone and how it alone will directly impact our economy is fairly provincial in thinking. The reality is this is a big city. And if these types of costs and tax increases bother you, time to move out. It's only going to increase and large metropolitan living is not for everyone.
What amuses me is that the same people who criticize the Valley for a lack of jobs and companies are the same ones who don't step up to the plate when there are opportunities to attract those things. How do you think companies move to your city and create wealth? Do you think standing at a podium and chanting anti-illegal immigration, pro guns and low taxes just encourages the Silicon Valley engineer to come to your state. It doesn't work that way. Let's start by creating a train/light rail public transportation system that other similar size cities have such as San Diego, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta have. Pretty simple: if you want nice things, you will have to pay for it. You're not going to get lucky and have companies and jobs fall from the sky by doing nothing.
The problem with your argument is that this argument could be made for any major development project in any city. You cannot project with 100% accuracy what numbers will be produced and if you did, it would likely forecast weak numbers. The point you are missing is that major infrastructure projects require a lot of money and you will not see immediate gains. The benefit of these projects will not be felt for decades and will really impact our children and grandchildren. In other large metropolitan areas, they understand this and green light these projects. But in Phoenix, we have still have this Farmer Brown's small town mentality and nit pick every project that would be considered common sense in any other major metropolitan area. Light rail alone will not create jobs but it's a combination of light rail, increased number companies, improved schools etc that will improve our economy. For you to feel like you are so enlightened because you examined light rail alone and how it alone will directly impact our economy is fairly provincial in thinking. The reality is this is a big city. And if these types of costs and tax increases bother you, time to move out. It's only going to increase and large metropolitan living is not for everyone.
What amuses me is that the same people who criticize the Valley for a lack of jobs and companies are the same ones who don't step up to the plate when there are opportunities to attract those things. How do you think companies move to your city and create wealth? Do you think standing at a podium and chanting anti-illegal immigration, pro guns and low taxes just encourages the Silicon Valley engineer to come to your state. It doesn't work that way. Let's start by creating a train/light rail public transportation system that other similar size cities have such as San Diego, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta have. Pretty simple: if you want nice things, you will have to pay for it. You're not going to get lucky and have companies and jobs fall from the sky by doing nothing.
Transportation taxes aren't just blindly approved in cities across the country. A few years ago there was a T-SPLOST (Transportation Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax) on the ballot in the Atlanta area which failed by a 2-1 margin. That tax was A LOT more specific than 104 and would have funded transit, highway, street, bike, and pedestrian improvements in the Atlanta area. It failed, bt Atlanta continues to move forward as a world class city. Phoenix can do the same. The regional propositions that have funded transportation improvements regionwide are still generating money for local jurisdictions, including Phoenix.
Just because someone opposes 104 doesn't mean that they oppose progress. This is an extremely ambiguous referendum. If there was a scheduled listing of projects that would be funded with this tax and more general transparency, there would likely be more support for this. Is light rail going to be extended to South Phoenix in the next ten years? What roads will be resurfaced or retrofitted with bike lanes? No one seems to know. You can't blame people for voting no on a $31 billion referendum that is so vague.
I live in Central Phoenix, and I did vote for the existing Rail. I tend to favor a progressive agenda and am not averse to paying higher taxes for infrastructure and schools (I have no children). But light rail has done nothing to improve traffic congestion or the quality of life. Local businesses went out of business or are barely holding on. Of course, big businesses like Starbucks and Target continue to thrive.
Since the Rail was built, traffic congestion is worse. I avoid streets with the Rail, because it takes longer to get through a light. Based on the traffic congestion, I'd say most people still drive. Even if the Rail is extended to cover more areas of Phoenix, people won't use it. It's too hot to walk to a transit station most of the year, and most people are transporting children, older relatives or shopping purchases. Rail is not feasible here. It doesn't make sense to spend massive amounts of money on something that few people use. And one shouldn't compare not wanting to pay for the expense of light rail to failing to fund schools--large numbers of people use the public school system.
Crime has not decreased in our Central Phoenix neighborhood since the Rail was built. In fact, we have had more burglaries and more vagrants in our neighborhood. I don't see how building more rail lines to link the Metro Center area, South Phoenix and West Phoenix with Central Phoenix will do anything to improve the quality of life here.
Apparently, the Rail isn't particularly safe either. Despite the inconvenience of the Light Rail construction, I was looking forward to riding the Rail. However, when I learned of the problems with vagrants riding the rail, I decided not to take the chance. Not having security on board to enforce rules was a huge mistake. When discussing the Rail with City employees at a neighborhood meeting, I was told that they were aware of the freeloader and vagrancy problems and were working on it. That was two or three years ago. Since then, I have heard from a friend of mine who rides the rail that he will not be riding anymore because of the increasing numbers of riffraff riding the train. It has not gotten better as promised. Nothing I have seen at the Rail stations convinces me otherwise.
Why not just have more buses? People who use the Rail probably use buses as well. Why disrupt neighborhoods, businesses and local traffic when we could just have more buses running more often. At least the buses have a driver to collect fares. And with the current internet connectivity people have, setting up car-pools should be easier than in the past.
Now, I'm guessing that someone (probably representing the Big Money sending those flyers I receive in the mail DAILY) will respond with numbers and quotes from a study that says that crime has gone down and there are more businesses, etc. But I live in a neighborhood with the Rail less than a mile away. I've seen for myself, and I know what is going on. I also know that you can manipulate data and numbers to prove almost any point. There is no reason this proposition for a light rail extension had to be lumped in with police, fire, roads, buses, and other infrastructure improvements. It's just another way to force this expensive and ineffective rail option down our throats. The City should submit another infrastructure proposition without the Rail.
I recently drove on the stretch of 19th Ave from Dunlap to Glendale, where the construction project on that particular extension of the light is still in progress, and from what I saw, they added more traffic lights, one at Alice Ave, and another one about 1/2 mile further south, forgot which street but it was around the apartment complexes on both sides of 19th Ave, and 2 more lights on 19th Ave between Northern and Glendale Avenues, which will cause more traffic congestion. I wanted to make a left turn at Butler (1/2 mile north of Northern Ave) and I had to sit there and wait in the left turn lane for over 5 minutes, even though there was NO traffic in the south-bound lanes of 19th Ave. The left turn arrow was not there before, and I have no idea why it was added. I realize there will be light-rail trains going through there some day and motorists will have to wait, but as to why they made the red arrow last so long is beyond me! It should be a caution arrow (flashing yellow) when no trains are going through there, and they should be red ONLY when trains are approaching. Also, from what I understand, this stretch (from Bethany Home Rd. to Dunlap Ave.) should have been completed in August of this year, and it's nowhere near completed. I can only think of 2 words - Cost Overrun - and I hope we're not paying for that.
We're paying a big part of the $32 billion for something that will not reduce congestion and for something not many people will be using. Every time I see a train on Central Ave, there aren't that many people riding it, and like you said, the light rail is not a feasible form of mass transit in the Phoenix area, and for those who want to use the light rail, they'll still have to drive to get to a station, and probably pay a parking fee to leave their vehicles in the lot during their work hours, and in most cases, they'll still have to switch to a bus to get to their work location.
I cannot see why some people feel that the light rail will be good for the Phoenix area, it might work for those who live along 19th Ave, west Camelback, or north Central Ave, and they work in downtown Phoenix, but it will not work for everyone else.
I recently drove on the stretch of 19th Ave from Dunlap to Glendale, where the construction project on that particular extension of the light is still in progress, and from what I saw, they added more traffic lights, one at Alice Ave, and another one about 1/2 mile further south, forgot which street but it was around the apartment complexes on both sides of 19th Ave, and 2 more lights on 19th Ave between Northern and Glendale Avenues, which will cause more traffic congestion. I wanted to make a left turn at Butler (1/2 mile north of Northern Ave) and I had to sit there and wait in the left turn lane for over 5 minutes, even though there was NO traffic in the south-bound lanes of 19th Ave. The left turn arrow was not there before, and I have no idea why it was added. I realize there will be light-rail trains going through there some day and motorists will have to wait, but as to why they made the red arrow last so long is beyond me! It should be a caution arrow (flashing yellow) when no trains are going through there, and they should be red ONLY when trains are approaching. Also, from what I understand, this stretch (from Bethany Home Rd. to Dunlap Ave.) should have been completed in August of this year, and it's nowhere near completed. I can only think of 2 words - Cost Overrun - and I hope we're not paying for that.
We're paying a big part of the $32 billion for something that will not reduce congestion and for something not many people will be using. Every time I see a train on Central Ave, there aren't that many people riding it, and like you said, the light rail is not a feasible form of mass transit in the Phoenix area, and for those who want to use the light rail, they'll still have to drive to get to a station, and probably pay a parking fee to leave their vehicles in the lot during their work hours, and in most cases, they'll still have to switch to a bus to get to their work location.
I cannot see why some people feel that the light rail will be good for the Phoenix area, it might work for those who live along 19th Ave, west Camelback, or north Central Ave, and they work in downtown Phoenix, but it will not work for everyone else.
I agree that the timing of the lights along the light rail corridor, especially in Phoenix, is horrible. Many other cities do not run their entire light rail systems down the medians of major thoroughfares. It would be more desirable to have light rail either elevated or at least not running down the middle of major streets. I don't believe that confusing drivers with flashing yellow lights is the way to control traffic. Drivers here are undisciplined and cannot handle the complexity of a flashing yellow arrow. A dedicated non flashing left turn arrow is needed to keep drivers in check.
Also, most people who use the light rail don't drive to get on it. There are buses that connect with light rail stations and quite a few people live within walking distance of the stations.
Originally Posted by R_Cowgirl This is not about politics, and there are many Democrats who don't support this bill. Take time to read the links and study some of the very articulate and coherent posts here.
Just because many of us question the language, the intent and the sponsors of Proposition 104 doesn't make us anti-growth, anti-planned growth or anti-light rail (or any other kind of transportation improvement.) It simply says that many of us who are opposed did our homework, read the bill and found it lacking. If this is such a good idea, we have another year before the election to work out the kinks in this bill and they can propose it again. Till I see more accountability and less weaseling - It's a NO for me.
Whatever you do, make sure you vote before Tuesday. You have several places and several ways to do that: look it up here: Voting Centers Address
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
The problem with your argument is that this argument could be made for any major development project in any city. You cannot project with 100% accuracy what numbers will be produced and if you did, it would likely forecast weak numbers. The point you are missing is that major infrastructure projects require a lot of money and you will not see immediate gains. The benefit of these projects will not be felt for decades and will really impact our children and grandchildren. In other large metropolitan areas, they understand this and green light these projects. But in Phoenix, we have still have this Farmer Brown's small town mentality and nit pick every project that would be considered common sense in any other major metropolitan area. Light rail alone will not create jobs but it's a combination of light rail, increased number companies, improved schools etc that will improve our economy. For you to feel like you are so enlightened because you examined light rail alone and how it alone will directly impact our economy is fairly provincial in thinking. The reality is this is a big city. And if these types of costs and tax increases bother you, time to move out. It's only going to increase and large metropolitan living is not for everyone.
What amuses me is that the same people who criticize the Valley for a lack of jobs and companies are the same ones who don't step up to the plate when there are opportunities to attract those things. How do you think companies move to your city and create wealth? Do you think standing at a podium and chanting anti-illegal immigration, pro guns and low taxes just encourages the Silicon Valley engineer to come to your state. It doesn't work that way. Let's start by creating a train/light rail public transportation system that other similar size cities have such as San Diego, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta have. Pretty simple: if you want nice things, you will have to pay for it. You're not going to get lucky and have companies and jobs fall from the sky by doing nothing.
What amuses me is that you didn't even read my post. Your post has nothing to do with my post. And you keep saying the same thing over and over. We aren't against growth. We aren't against paying for growth. We are against corruption. We find this bill to be suspicious and lacking in accountability. We are concerned that when questioned, the city council could not answer simple questions about the bill. I will put this in caps so you get it: THIS IS A FLAWED BILL. Opposition to a flawed bill is not opposition to the project. You just keep saying things over and over about guns and immigration. It sounds to me like perhaps YOU are the one living in the wrong place. THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS BILL ABOUT GUNS, IMMIGRATION, JOBS, CREATING WEALTH, SILICON VALLEY, ENGINEERS..... nothing. nada. It. Is. A. Flawed. Bill. Period.
What amuses me is that you didn't even read my post. Your post has nothing to do with my post. And you keep saying the same thing over and over. We aren't against growth. We aren't against paying for growth. We are against corruption. We find this bill to be suspicious and lacking in accountability. We are concerned that when questioned, the city council could not answer simple questions about the bill. I will put this in caps so you get it: THIS IS A FLAWED BILL. Opposition to a flawed bill is not opposition to the project. You just keep saying things over and over about guns and immigration. It sounds to me like perhaps YOU are the one living in the wrong place. THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS BILL ABOUT GUNS, IMMIGRATION, JOBS, CREATING WEALTH, SILICON VALLEY, ENGINEERS..... nothing. nada. It. Is. A. Flawed. Bill. Period.
It could be said any bill of this nature has flaws.
Look at what we voted on over ten years ago to build more reliever freeways, when did groundbreaking begin on SR 30?
But that same bill helped build the long-awaited 303 Loop and widen other freeeays.
Nothing calling for an increase in funds and more construction is going to be perfect but that's the nature of the beast, Phoenix is an ever-growing, expanding metropolitan area that needs to progress with the growth.
It's your right to be against it but I'm not seeing any viable alternatives put on the table by the opposition.
If this measure is defeated it will be a long time before another supposedly better measure is drafted, and by then it will be even more expensive to expand mass transit.
It's a matter of paying the taxes now or pay more taxes later for a similar measure, at which point there will most surely be another debate on the costs, the verbiage, the corruption behind it, and whatnot.
I'm convinced the strongest opponents are going to be against anything if it makes them pay a few cents extra in taxes at the store.
Last edited by Java Jolt; 08-24-2015 at 09:35 PM..
Reason: grammar correction
Our system of government is so corrupt at least in 3rd world country's it's normal practice but here they do it in closed doors while and put a smile on their faces.
Phoenix election: Mayor, Prop. 104 campaigns raise more than $1 million each
The campaign received about $648,000 in donations and in-kind contributions between June 1 and Aug. 13, bringing the total raised to just over $1 million since it was formed in March. Major donors include construction companies, engineering firms
What do they get for their million $$ I bet those will be the same companies who some how win bids to do all the work.
You can't diversify our economy and attract high paying jobs if you are trying to appeal to good ole boys. Look at your target audience. People who are highly educated with high paying careers are typically not people who share the same hobbies and philosophy as Ted Nugent. Yeah I know, it's hard to believe.
I'm astonished by some of the people in this state. Do you really think people who start companies are people like them? Hey let's attract Ivy league educated white collar executives by embracing immigrant bashing, gun rights, poor education funding, limiting womens right to choose, trampling of gay rights...yeah I'm sure the guy from Harvard is really into those things.
That's comparable to trying to lure the Bass Pro shop crowd by embracing vegetarian diets, hybrid vehicles, recycling, theater, and coffee shops.
Rethink your strategy. You may not like these people. They may not be like you. But they will keep you employed and bring money to the state. The "Huntin" crowd isn't doing that. Sorry
I beg to differ with you, I am a Phoenix native, a professional (Software Engineer) for a big company in the Phoenix area, and I share the same hobbies and philosophies (on the 2nd Amendment) as Ted Nugent. This is not about where we stand politically on the issues you mentioned, or the companies with high paying jobs that get attracted to the Phoenix area, we've had plenty of such companies during better economic times, this is about a proposal to supposedly "Improve" the transportation infrastructure for the Phoenix area which will cost us, our children, and possibly grandchildren, $32 billion, with wording in the proposal that does not specifically IMPLY that the $32 billion WILL be spent on such improvements. If you read the proposal, you'd understand why we're against 104, the words "MAY BE USED FOR" sound like we'll be paying $32 billion over a 35-year period for a lot of unknowns, which may or may not include the items that were mentioned in the proposal.
We're not against improving transportation in the Phoenix area, and I'm sure nobody is against attracting good companies here, we are against wasting $32 billion for what they say to improve transportation, but the implications in the wording would mean that in 10-15years, it could be spent on other items. The words "May" in this proposal would be like giving somebody you don't know $4,000 and telling them to get you a car, without knowing exactly what you're getting. Would you do that? Probably not.
I voted against it. I like the idea, I just saw too much opportunity for abuse and corruption. I hope it works to the best benefit of the CITIZENS, and not necessarily of the politicians and contractors.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
