The new proposal for DPW projects, is again a complete emphasis on traffic flow. Specifically, the city wants to spend $1.6 million on traffic flow in Mid City. Presumably (I can't find the actual proposal) they will replace a good portion of traffic lights with updated camera operated lights. The idea in general isn't a horrible idea (assuming they will keep their trend of installing pedestrian signals), because we all know the signals in Mid City are in sad shape. But I just see it as another focus on traffic flow and not the entire picture. The more we move traffic, the more traffic will want to move. This shouldn't be the goal. The goal should be to minimize trips needed, which saves money on infrastructure, reduces traffic, and keeps shopping local. And yet again, I can reduce the cost of my automobile. While I support the projects downtown (although the proposal spends $3 million on a park that was just recently built), it would be nice to have non-exclusive traffic infrastructure projects taking place inside the neighborhoods.
There are lots of Federal grant opportunities out there. Combining this buying power with the local monies found for traffic flow improvement would create an awesome plan for Government Street.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
CATS Funding
Article from The Advocate: CATS Considers Tax
CATS is again seeking a dedicated tax revenue to sustain the bus system. Public transit in our country has been underfunded for half a century, and the consequences has lead to a system that literally kills itself. If the bus system can not provide a "service", people won't use the service. Since, the majority of CATS is currently funded on ridership numbers (federal grants, box-fares), funding keeps falling. Thus leading to to even less service. Basically killing itself.
So how do you improve transit? Improve service. Transit will work. It works in lots of cities the size of Baton Rouge. Even if a car is necessary at some points in life, it wouldn't require a 2, 3, 4 car household. Most mid-sized cities use property taxes for funding transit. Heck, transit can substantially increase property values. So it makes sense. Why not use property tax as a funding source?
Well, the main reason is (of course) the inherent knee-jerk reaction about any tax increase in Baton Rouge. Never mind the fact that the bus system currently relies on other people's tax dollars (national and state), and very little of our own tax dollars (general fund). We just don't want to pay anymore taxes, regardless of what it is. Which I guess we can blame this mindset on the inefficiencies people can find in our government.
These same people would be the ones to say they wouldn't use the system anyway. Thus saying they shouldn't pay for the system (while I dish out my money to pay for their highway system). I don't buy this argument either. A complete system would be set up around all kinds of groups: the commuter, the elderly, the low income person, the high school student, and the college student. (Oh and the drinkers; or the bicyclist who doesn't want to ride both way; and the out of town visitor; along with the person that gets impatient and wants to leave a party before their ride, etc, etc, etc). These groups of people wouldn't use a system all the time. But their use will benefit the people that wouldn't use the system anytime. (This only includes the commuter who has an irregular commute pattern; the adult without children; the adults without older parents to bus around; and the people who never drive after 11:00 PM when enforcement of drunk driving sucks). All while increasing property value Parishwide. So when people say they won't use the transit system, it is a very short-sighted view point.
PS.
I can't find how much they are proposing for a tax levy, but I doubt it is anything over 2% (probably more within the 0.1%) range. I don't know about anyone else, but that would increase my property taxes less than $5/year. (That's about 1/8 a fill up or 0.01% of my yearly transportation budget).
CATS is again seeking a dedicated tax revenue to sustain the bus system. Public transit in our country has been underfunded for half a century, and the consequences has lead to a system that literally kills itself. If the bus system can not provide a "service", people won't use the service. Since, the majority of CATS is currently funded on ridership numbers (federal grants, box-fares), funding keeps falling. Thus leading to to even less service. Basically killing itself.
So how do you improve transit? Improve service. Transit will work. It works in lots of cities the size of Baton Rouge. Even if a car is necessary at some points in life, it wouldn't require a 2, 3, 4 car household. Most mid-sized cities use property taxes for funding transit. Heck, transit can substantially increase property values. So it makes sense. Why not use property tax as a funding source?
Well, the main reason is (of course) the inherent knee-jerk reaction about any tax increase in Baton Rouge. Never mind the fact that the bus system currently relies on other people's tax dollars (national and state), and very little of our own tax dollars (general fund). We just don't want to pay anymore taxes, regardless of what it is. Which I guess we can blame this mindset on the inefficiencies people can find in our government.
These same people would be the ones to say they wouldn't use the system anyway. Thus saying they shouldn't pay for the system (while I dish out my money to pay for their highway system). I don't buy this argument either. A complete system would be set up around all kinds of groups: the commuter, the elderly, the low income person, the high school student, and the college student. (Oh and the drinkers; or the bicyclist who doesn't want to ride both way; and the out of town visitor; along with the person that gets impatient and wants to leave a party before their ride, etc, etc, etc). These groups of people wouldn't use a system all the time. But their use will benefit the people that wouldn't use the system anytime. (This only includes the commuter who has an irregular commute pattern; the adult without children; the adults without older parents to bus around; and the people who never drive after 11:00 PM when enforcement of drunk driving sucks). All while increasing property value Parishwide. So when people say they won't use the transit system, it is a very short-sighted view point.
PS.
I can't find how much they are proposing for a tax levy, but I doubt it is anything over 2% (probably more within the 0.1%) range. I don't know about anyone else, but that would increase my property taxes less than $5/year. (That's about 1/8 a fill up or 0.01% of my yearly transportation budget).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)