Constitution allegedly makes transit/fixing roads hard. So cut the BS and fix it.

I've repeatedly seen on this board for years that Michigans constitution makes it virtually impossible for cities/regions to adequately fund public transportation, road repair and [[potentially) future issues as taxing marijuana or other red light district related fun if those issues ever find their ways to this state.

I personally can't find exactly where the constitution forbids these funding sources, however if they're keeping Michigan/Detroit from ceasing to be the shitty place it currnetly is I'm all for tearing it down.

Keep in mind I am in no way shape or a lawyer, politician or wealthy man. And with that...

WHAT

I propose offering the state a chance to amend the constitution to make it easier to easier for communities to ask citizens to help improve themselves. Mainly for transit but also for public safety.

I found the parts of the document that MAY be a problem. If you have any constructive criticism or advice please speak on it.

Article VII Section 16

Article IX Section 3

Article IX Section 8

Article IX Section 9

Article IX Section 10

Article IX Section 26

WHEN

I am targetting the next presidential election. Which is November 1, 2016

All paper work needs to be in 120 days beforehand.

Which by my calculation is July 4, 2016.

I'll assume it needs to be in comfortably before that.

WHO

I'm pretty damned serious about this, however I don't have all the resources or even know what all resources I'll need.

If you have connections, experience or share this vision PM me, or post in this thread.

WHERE

This would be a statewide issue and would need a statewide push. Again not an area of expertise for me but that's where help would be appreciated.

HOW

A petition will need to be turned in with percent of ALL votes cast in for governor in the most recent election.

3,226,088 votes for Gov were cast in '10.

At least 322, 609 valid signatures would be needed if it were held this year. There is obviously another election this year but I would assume a similar number would be required 2 years from now.

-An expert/professional identifying exactly which part of the constitution would need to be changed. *~

-A lawyer/legal professional to write a protest/veto proof petition language. Also to defend against any protests/appeals which do come forward. *~

- Any marketing, be it radio, television, newspaper/magazine, internet or mailer on the runup to a potential election. *~

- A website/social networking base to gather support/potential donations. *~

~-Potential political consulting group with experience in petitioin drives. May help with any or all of the above. *

*-Establishment of a secure account/trust for the adequate funding of the above.

I'm under no delusion that this would be a cheap or easy undertaking. And why I'm feeling things out 2 and a half years in advance.

Thanks for reading.

The questions to fix the roads in 'Michissippi' [[Michigan) lies on politics:



WHO is responsible for taxation?

WHEN is the road fixing plan being implemented?

WHERE do we get the money?

HOW is the money from regional taxation on the road is being taking care of ?

WHY do we need to fix the roads?


Gov. Snyder, the nerd would have to go through lot of talk to get our roads fixed. When Springtime comes, pothole season begins. Patch and putting dental-like fillings on old concrete and asphalt will not do. Our roads in 'Michissippi' [[Michigan) is worst in the United States. Much worse when your car get torn up and swallow it the drivers whole.


WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET!

Keep on driving folks!

I miss you so, Neda

For the 99 Percenters, George Stinney, Rodney King and Guy Fawkes

I believe the following link is the part of the Constitution you are targeting:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/[[S[[1uj...l-Article-IX-9

The issue is gasoline tax. That tax revenue has declined in real dollars because of several reasons, the main reason is because we are using less gas because cars get better gas mileage. In '97 or so John Engler crafted a user fee on top of the 1964 tax, that fee more than doubled the amt of money collected but it didn't change the original edict that all the proceeds must be used to build and maintain roads.

Bus or train monies come out of the general fund, hence they are prone to political give and take. Out-state Michiganders do not have busses or trains or streetcars and are not fans of sending their money to an area that has not shown it can operate the systems they have now.

One could think this is a chicken-or-egg question, but if you are serious about changing the Constitution of Michigan you will have to develop a very compelling story to persuade an old lady in Alpena that Detroit needs the money more than she does.

Oh Brizee, I thought you were moving to Chicago. What happened to that plan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gnome

Oh Brizee, I thought you were moving to Chicago. What happened to that plan?

---

The industry I majored in isn't hiring entry level position anywhere that I'm willing to move to.

Looks like it's grad school so I'm stuck here for awhile. Rather not go into debt for tens of thousands of dollars, but that's life.

Gnome, generally you are correct, but the CTF comes out of the gas tax to fund transit. Rail funds are subject to the larger general budget only. When the gas tax was last raised of the four cents one cent went to bridges and the other three went to the highway side.

This is how it currently shakes out:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MD...ms_78373_7.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gnome

I believe the following link is the part of the Constitution you are targeting:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/[[S[[1uj...l-Article-IX-9

The issue is gasoline tax. That tax revenue has declined in real dollars because of several reasons, the main reason is because we are using less gas because cars get better gas mileage. In '97 or so John Engler crafted a user fee on top of the 1964 tax, that fee more than doubled the amt of money collected but it didn't change the original edict that all the proceeds must be used to build and maintain roads.

Bus or train monies come out of the general fund, hence they are prone to political give and take. Out-state Michiganders do not have busses or trains or streetcars and are not fans of sending their money to an area that has not shown it can operate the systems they have now.

One could think this is a chicken-or-egg question, but if you are serious about changing the Constitution of Michigan you will have to develop a very compelling story to persuade an old lady in Alpena that Detroit needs the money more than she does.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I had heard that this local funding issue was entirely different from the gas tax -that there was some section of the state Constitution which prohibits localities from imposing local sales taxes [[and perhaps other forms of taxes?) on themselves. I thought that was what the OP was referring to. Local sales taxes are how many other metro areas around the country fund transit [[Measure R in Los Angeles being a well-known example which also puts 20% of the funds toward highways).

It would seem to be a much more plausible route to funding local improvements, since the old lady in Alpena doesn't figure into the equation at all except insofar as her vote may be required to change the Constitution. And it's also more equitable than the vehicle registration fee proposal for the RTA, since people who don't have or register cars will still be paying sales tax. But as stated, apparently this runs afoul of some provision in the Constitution - though I didn't see anything that looked relevant in the OP's links [[IANAL).

Or am I entirely off-base here?

There is strong support to change the State constitution to allow County Sales taxes. Transit tax advocates who want the RTA agreement think the Penny tax is fair because everyone pays and not just property and car owners. It is proposed that half goes to the road commission and half to transit operators such as SMART and DDOT. Do any of you think this is a good idea? Why? Better ideas?

Sales taxes are popular

If one is looking for a cause,to combine fixing roads and funding for public transportation together is kinda overwhelming.Fed funds and support for transit and roads are two different areas.

The lack of fixing of the roads and finding the funds are a country wide problem which there is no cast in concrete solution.

Public transit is another game all together as there are other cities with bad roads but also have a well functioning public transportation system in place.Crumbling infrastructure is a national problem.

There are also public transit advocates that support it on a country wide base and not just in a bubble,so there is no need to reinvent the wheel it has been done before,they are happy to lend support and provide support as to the process.

You do not need to be a politician,you get the support and signatures,then you find one to support that will help your cause,in both signatures and campaign donations.

The flip side is one needs to also be ready to lend that support in their cause on something that you may not like or agree with,that is the cost of politics,and it plays all the way down to your new city council structure.

Forget about party lines as your cause can see no lines and needs to remain neutral.

I would agree that Detroit is unique,but when it comes to the basics,no matter where you go it is all the same process and not rocket science.

IMO the first step would be to start contacting transit organizers in other cities as they have been there and done that.What is good for Detroit is good for the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

If one is looking for a cause,to combine fixing roads and funding for public transportation together is kinda overwhelming.Fed funds and support for transit and roads are two different areas.

The lack of fixing of the roads and finding the funds are a country wide problem which there is no cast in concrete solution.

Public transit is another game all together as there are other cities with bad roads but also have a well functioning public transportation system in place.Crumbling infrastructure is a national problem.

There are also public transit advocates that support it on a country wide base and not just in a bubble,so there is no need to reinvent the wheel it has been done before,they are happy to lend support and provide support as to the process.

You do not need to be a politician,you get the support and signatures,then you find one to support that will help your cause,in both signatures and campaign donations.

The flip side is one needs to also be ready to lend that support in their cause on something that you may not like or agree with,that is the cost of politics,and it plays all the way down to your new city council structure.

Forget about party lines as your cause can see no lines and needs to remain neutral.

I would agree that Detroit is unique,but when it comes to the basics,no matter where you go it is all the same process and not rocket science.

IMO the first step would be to start contacting transit organizers in other cities as they have been there and done that.What is good for Detroit is good for the country.

---

There are many correlations between public transit and roads, the same as trucks and railroads. Intermodal is a key concept to moving both freight and passengers to promote safety and lower costs.

In 2003, I filled the buses on 4 different routes and coordinated SMART and DDOT systems by removing my mass transit plan off the shelf. I did this to fight the I-75 and I-94 Multi Billion Dollar freeway expansions. I don't agree to these because MDOT is using the same money that used to pay for SMART in Livonia and all over southeast Michigan to match federal grants for them.

Tax shifting from state to local funding to shut down handicapped facilities and for essential bus service to work is against the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Next August, a YES or a NO vote will not cost anyone their job or bus service, despite what you might read in the newspapers.

Hey.

Michigan's Constitution says public pensions shall not be diminished.

The Bankruptcy Judge says it's just a contract, and contracts can be broken.

Bottom Line: Michigan's Constitution don't mean shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ray1936

Hey.

Michigan's Constitution says public pensions shall not be diminished.

The Bankruptcy Judge says it's just a contract, and contracts can be broken.

Bottom Line: Michigan's Constitution don't mean shit.

---

Ray, not to argue with you, but a couple of points to consider:

The words "shall not be diminished" could be construed as kept the same dollar amount while inflation gallops ahead with no COLAs for the pensioners.

The Michigan Constitution is not binding on the federal gummint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

Ray, not to argue with you, but a couple of points to consider:

The words "shall not be diminished" could be construed as kept the same dollar amount while inflation gallops ahead with no COLAs for the pensioners.

The Michigan Constitution is not binding on the federal gummint.

---

No argument. I'm on the old plan [[pre-1969) which has no COLA anyway. The guys on the new plan are sure to lose that COLA next week or whenever Uncle Sam says so.

Fortunately, I'm in good financial condition. Some of my old colleagues, though, are going to be hurting, and I grieve for them. :[[