Surprising, swingline, because Hackel is a Democrat. I guess he's more of a DINO. But valid points, indeed.
Printable View
Surprising, swingline, because Hackel is a Democrat. I guess he's more of a DINO. But valid points, indeed.
Thanks, great points, I agree the RTA plan was not properly publicized and that the leadership should be replaced before more 'told-ya-so' damage is done. But I would not blame the plan over incompetent and bigoted voters. In any other region/city, public transportation is a no-brainer. Even solidly conservative cities in the West and South are embracing public transit, rail, BRT, etc. Michiganders seem to like to play the victim/blame game, and not look forward. Imagine if the RTA actually DID send busses up to Romeo, people up there would be complaining about a 'bus to nowhere' in no time. I say leave those communities out of the plan, divide Oakland and Macomb into northern and southern areas, and have the communities of the southern areas fund the plan. Romeo is better off being connected to Flint than Detroit. So if the RTA wants to team up with Flint to connect the northern reaches of Oakland and Macomb to that area, then I'm all for it...
I see what you're saying but am trying to be pragmatic:
1. The RTA is a state creation and I'm not going to hold out hope for them to restructure such that northern Macomb and Oakland are lopped off. Though, yeah, that would fix the problem. Align the structure with the areas that actually want lots of transit.
2. Since RTA is not changing, we need to convince some of those voters. Remember that the vote was EXTREMELY close [[50.5 - 49.5). We don't need to convince 80% of them. Just 10% would have done it.
3. Some people are bigoted, for sure... but I think a lot of them also just don't have any experience or knowledge when it comes to public transit. This is to be expected - they live in a region that has the least and worst transit of any city its size in the country. Since we only need a few of them [[2) and we can't change the structure [[1), it all comes down to the approach, good leadership, and reaching out with education.
4. Lots of other regions turned down transit multiple times before finally turning the tide. Check out the history of regional transit in Seattle, which everyone assumes is a super-progressive wonderland, for a good example of this. I am honestly more surprised that we almost succeeded in 2016 than I am that it failed. But this is why we have to get credible leadership and a better plan in place for 2020. 2016 was a first attempt, not a high water mark.
I would actually be in favor of splitting north Oakland and north Macomb [[probably Hall Rd/South Blvd./Cooley Lake Rd.), save Pontiac, and combining them into one county and combing the southern portions of Warren and Oakland into one county. Obviously, the logistics of this would be a nightmare.
This. Taxation should be weighted to geography, not home value. In most metros with regional taxes, the transit taxation is weighted highest in the regions best served by transit [[so, for example, NYC residents pay more in MTA taxes than those in the Hudson Valley).
And the regional plan made no sense. Metro Detroit doesn't have a mobility problem, it has an access problem. It isn't that there's some desperate need for middle class people to move around the region in buses, it's that there are hundreds of thousands of poor people in the region's core with piss-poor bus service.
SMART, excepting a few corridors connecting Detroit to suburban job centers, is largely a waste of resources. We don't need more empty buses traveling down sidewalkless eight lane suburban highways. DDOT needs investment and service improvement. Screw Van Dyke and the like; newer areas [[say post 1960) are a lost cause for transit.
Is there a way to do this within the existing RTA setup? E.g. could they charge 0.5 mill in rural/exurban townships and 1.5 mill in inner suburbs / Detroit / Ann Arbor? I don't know if that would be politically easier or harder - but wondering what the possibilities are without further legislation.
That's an interesting concept. Typical urbanites choose high density living for the convenience of the services offered, city water, lighting, trash, police / fire, mobility choices. That is where the main services an operating RTA would be concentrated. Outlying areas might just need one stop every 5 miles or transit from village center to village center. Less service offered, less tax taken. Each somewhat providing the subsidy levels needed to help with essential transportation needs of that regions density.
If Mark Hackel is such the bad guy, how come his county is the only one with no opt-out communities on the SMART millage?
Maybe Hackel actually gives a shit about Warren. It is the third largest city in the state and in his county.
55 mills is already smothering Warren's appreciation rate and cranking it higher will only make it worse. A bunch of motor coaches won't help that in the real world. Next the flight steepens, everything goes to hell, schools, blight, crime, ability to mortgage, population drops fast. It's not like this script hasn't played out before in this state.
Just a different theory. He is a democrat after all, he might give damn about his constituents. He sure doesn't like the idiot running Warren these days and that says something about his intelligence.
Let's face it: people from Armada and Romeo want little or nothing to do with Detroit. Those towns aren't even exurbs. They have more in common with St. Clair. Or Bad Axe. It's unfortunate their votes count the same when it comes to matters such as this one that necessarily primarily affects Detroit and its suburbs. And for them I guess it's unfortunate their county is tied up in the dealings of Metro Detroit.
Too bad we can't re-shape the county maps to group people in ways that make more sense.
MODERATOR NOTICE
Posts have been removed from this thread due to incivility.
As per our policy posts that respond to uncivil posts are also removed so that all vestiges are cleared and the thread is purely on topic.
PLEASE do not respond to uncivil posts.
It only encourages and gains attention for the perpetrators, spreads the poison and disrupts our civil and serious discussion.
Kindly click the Report Post icon Attachment 32868 [found below every post] to notify us of rules-violating posts.
Still, in 2017 a cell plan that is $200 per month for one line is far outside of what one would consider normal or reasonable. Maybe there's a good explanation for it being so high, but he did reimburse the RTA [[After the charges were questioned) so I'd venture to say the likelihood of that is rather slim.
Why should these be regional priorities? In 1950, yeah, but nowadays employment is regionally dispersed, very few exurbanites work downtown, there are no congestion issues headed downtown, and parking rates downtown are dirt cheap compared to other major cities.
You really think there's an exurban demographic wishing for more buses to take them to Detroit? Why would you typical exurban family of four wait at a bus stop in January to take them downtown to an arena event? How is that easier than taking the SUV?
Ever taken a stroller on public transit? It sucks even in the Paris-London-NYC type cities, with comprehensive transit. I can't imagine any non-poor rider would make this choice in Metro Detroit.
The folks in Macomb County seem to be of the mindset that because a bus isn't literally traveling down their block or if they're literally not "AIS" on these buses, there's no reason for them to support the RTA, even if it's for the greater good of the entire region [[as Detroiters realize by supporting the HCMA).
There is a park in their county within reasonable striking distance, the same as there is one in Wayne county at a reasonable distance for Detroiters to patronize. You're comparing apples to oranges with the transit. It won't be within reasonable distance for a lot of people in northern Macomb County. I don't agree with them not voting for the greater good and if I lived there I would vote for it, but I see the point of them rather having something they could use for their tax dollars. They aren't at all happy with paying for the Zoo and the DIA already, so this is one more thing for them to dissent about. Most of them would probably rather have some form of transport that takes them to Mt Clemens or Clinton Twp where many of them shop and work.
If you lived in Detroit and Pontiac was putting in a system that would stop at 10 Mile and Telegraph, you wouldn't have a lot of use for it either.
Maybe people on Romeo Plank want to go somewhere other than where you think. Not everyone wants to go downtown.
I think regional transit is a great idea. But if we think of it as a 'downtown centric' system, we may be ignoring a lot of the population.
[[Recently, you can see what happens when you ignore the actual concerns of rural people in our Presidential choice. The next shock for the urban classes will be when PDT becomes increasingly popular. Heads will explode.)
Another problem with regional transit is that a lot of people don't trust our bureaucrats and politicians to actually invest in transit -- but instead to create featherbedding factories. Its a side-effect of affirmative action coming back via the law of unintended consequences. Affirmative action leads to resistance to suburban transit funding. Whoda thunk.
Poor rural people. Everything is stacked against them. For example, as we all know, the Michigan transportation budget funds gold plated subways, light rail, and buses in urban areas like Detroit while spending next to nothing on highways. And similarly, their presidential choices have to get almost as many votes as the Democrat if they even want to win the election! How unfair! And then when tax season comes around, low-earning rural people have to wait up to six weeks to get a tax refund paid for by high-earning city dwellers. Yes, it's high time we all learned from the simple wisdom of rural America and lived within our means, after adjusting our means to include ongoing subsidies from others with higher-paying jobs who we can vilify.