Wayne County republican trying to castrate/kill the RTA.

**brizee** · May-03-13, 03:18 PM

The story was in another thread but I thought this ass-clown deserved individual attention.

The next time posters on here have the audacity to state that only when the black/Detroit vote is diluted will progress happen, here's the reality check.

**bailey** · May-03-13, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by brizee

The story was in another thread but I thought this ass-clown deserved individual attention.

The next time posters on here have the audacity to state that only when the black/Detroit vote is diluted will progress happen, here's the reality check.

From the Article:

“R-Plymouth Township, one of the lawmakers who voted against the RTA, said Thursday that he wants to give local communities the right to withdraw or opt into the transit authority as communities now do with the suburban SMART bus system.

This legislation is meant to be a tool in the toolbox for local communities,” said Heise, who represents communities that have opted out of SMART’s millage.

I guess, I'm confused....If they are already out of SMART, why should they be forced to be in the RTA? They have voted that they don't want buses and don't want to pay for something they have opted out of... why is it an attempt to castrate the RTA? I mean, they are already NOT funding buses.

**ghettopalmetto** · May-03-13, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

From the Article:

I guess, I'm confused....If they are already out of SMART, why should they be forced to be in the RTA? They have voted that they don't want buses and don't want to pay for something they have opted out of... why is it an attempt to castrate the RTA? I mean, they are already NOT funding buses.

Opting-out defeats the purpose of a regional authority, don't you think?

Just more do-nothing "leadership" at work here.

**corktownyuppie** · May-03-13, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Opting-out defeats the purpose of a regional authority, don't you think?

Just more do-nothing "leadership" at work here.

Dead in the water. This isn't going anywhere. There are crazy politicians and ideas on both sides. Sometimes I think the media gives them way too much focus.

**Detroitnerd** · May-03-13, 04:42 PM

You're always going to have some people trying to chip away at the authority. Heck, you're going to have it anytime the government takes taxes and spends them for something bigger or more remote than the curb cut at the local Wendy's.

**Al Publican** · May-03-13, 05:19 PM

I like the idea of light rail, but I'm thinking more of late that buses are a more flexible and less expensive option. Bus lines can be altered with demographic changes. Light rail is expensive. A bus could also serve handicap folks by dropping them off at their dwelling.

**hortonz** · May-03-13, 05:25 PM

God bless those clueless Republicans and their pathetic attempt to keep America from joining the 21st century. There will certainly be a special place in hell for them and their brand of lunacy.

**bailey** · May-03-13, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Opting-out defeats the purpose of a regional authority, don't you think?

Just more do-nothing "leadership" at work here.

Yes. and I'm not arguing that they should, but, the reality is that they already opted out. Now they are being "opted back in" against their wishes. Which would be against the will of the voter in that district.

Wouldn't this be the same as people who voted against and EFM in a referendum and were successful, being slightly miffed when the legislature does an end run and then just re-enacts a slightly different version of the law they just voted down?

**antongast** · May-03-13, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

I guess, I'm confused....If they are already out of SMART, why should they be forced to be in the RTA? They have voted that they don't want buses and don't want to pay for something they have opted out of... why is it an attempt to castrate the RTA? I mean, they are already NOT funding buses.

The existence of opt-outs has always been a huge weakness for SMART, and is one of the key problems the RTA was supposed to correct. Opt-outs make it difficult to plan any kind of coherent routes, because you have to run them around the holes in the system. SMART has to run non-stop service through postage stamps like Lathrup Village and Bloomfield Hills, cutting down on potential ridership and making the system less useful without actually saving any money, and they have to underserve places like Farmington Hills that are paying for SMART service but are right next to a bunch of opt-out communities, making it impractical to design routes that do a good job serving those places, which strengthens the case for those places to opt out as well. While the voters in a particular community might not want or need bus service, there are still going to be people from other parts of the region who have reason to travel to those communities, so providing bus service even in places where local residents don't use it benefits the region as a whole. Also it makes it a lot easier to coordinate with neighboring providers if you have service across the entire region. SMART can't link to AATA right now because the townships on the western edge of Wayne County all opted out.

**antongast** · May-03-13, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

Yes. and I'm not arguing that they should, but, the reality is that they already opted out. Now they are being "opted back in" against their wishes. Which would be against the will of the voter in that district.

Wouldn't this be the same as people who voted against and EFM in a referendum and were successful, being slightly miffed when the legislature does an end run and then just re-enacts a slightly different version of the law they just voted down?

Making it a city-by-city vote is arbitrary, though. Why should it be done that way? That happens to be the way SMART was set up, but I don't particularly see why that's more democratic than making the "voting district" the entire RTA region.

**Novine** · May-03-13, 05:58 PM

Where's the legislation allowing communities to opt-out of the gas tax and from receiving any benefits or services related to highway funding?

**DetroitPlanner** · May-03-13, 06:15 PM

Novine:

The gas tax contributes a significant portion of the budget needed to operate and replace buses for SMART and most of the other transit agencies in the state. Many people do not buy gas in the same community they reside in, but rather where and when they need it.

**gnome** · May-04-13, 06:20 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Novine:

The gas tax contributes a significant portion of the budget needed to operate and replace buses for SMART and most of the other transit agencies in the state. Many people do not buy gas in the same community they reside in, but rather where and when they need it.

When did that happen? I thought the 1964 Constitutional re-write tossed 100% of gas-tax revenue into road building and maintenance. Do I need to re-educate myself on this matter?

on the subject of opting in... So far this discussion has failed to address the overwhelming insanity of supporting two bus systems. The current DDOT and SMART systems overlap some service areas and leave others wanting. It makes zero sense to support such a push-me,pull-you confuzzlement, in fact it could be argued that supporting such a system is akin to supporting South Africa in the bad old days.

you don't improve insanity by funding it.

It is my understanding, the new RTA addresses our uniquely stupid double-doodoo system by doing away with both, and building anew.

Do I understand this correctly?

**Gorath** · May-04-13, 07:34 AM

The constitution says;

100% of gas taxes in the state of Michigan has to be used for transportation. This includes roads, bike trails, buses.

At least 90% has to be used on roads for motor vehicles. That leaves 0% to 10% that MDOT can spend on bike trails, buses, etc.

This only covers the tax on fuel [[per gallon). It does not cover the sales tax on fuel.

Source;
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%2...l-Article-IX-9

**Novine** · May-04-13, 03:56 PM

"The gas tax contributes a significant portion of the budget needed to operate and replace buses for SMART and most of the other transit agencies in the state. Many people do not buy gas in the same community they reside in, but rather where and when they need it."

Apologies that my sarcastic response elicited a thoughtful response. My point is that no one ever asks to opt-out of funding the road side of the transportation system and no legislator would propose legislation to allow any community to do that. Why is transit treated differently?

**hudkina** · May-11-13, 10:08 PM

My city doesn't have any freeways, does that mean we should be able to opt out of paying for them?

**wolverine** · May-12-13, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by Al Publican

I like the idea of light rail, but I'm thinking more of late that buses are a more flexible and less expensive option. Bus lines can be altered with demographic changes. Light rail is expensive. A bus could also serve handicap folks by dropping them off at their dwelling.

That's paratransit. It's too expensive to customize large buses on specialized trips, and paratransit vehicles more safely and conveniently meet the needs of ADA passengers. Buses do not.

The rationale behind the streetcars are they are forced to run efficiently and clear of traffic on steel rails. No vehicle can safely get in front of them. Therefore they can pass through traffic and stop far less than a bus would. The central reason why people despise taking buses in cities is they stop all the time or get stuck in traffic.

BRT is a viable substitute, but rarely do US cities do Gold Standard BRT. At the standard your costs run nearly comparable to light rail systems.

So any discussion you hear of "viable bus alternatives" for the streetcars is political jabber because:

1. Detroit will never follow through with a Gold Standard BRT system to deliver viable service.
2. Would reintroduce some rebranded bus service that would do little to improve reliable mobility.

Substantial transit lines have spatial implications. I know the "if you build it they will come" phrase has become trite in these threads but I'm 100% certain the streetcars will be a catalyst to development in the Woodward Corridor.

**Honky Tonk** · May-12-13, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by hudkina

My city doesn't have any freeways, does that mean we should be able to opt out of paying for them?

Absolutely! As long as you can assure me none of your city residents will ever set tire on a MI freeway.

**DetroitPlanner** · May-12-13, 08:31 AM

I always found the argument regarding transit opt out justification a tad ironic. If you refuse to offer transit, the of course you are going to have few riders. That does not mean however that you have a City that is functioning at its best. If there was transit? Would it be used? If not by those living there, how about by those working there? Would you rather a person get dropped off and picked up everyday forcing four car trips on a route, or would you rather have one shared trip taking several cars off the road?

**Novine** · May-12-13, 11:22 AM

"Absolutely! As long as you can assure me none of your city residents will ever set tire on a MI freeway."

Why should they? We never demand that those who opt-out of transit assure anyone that their residents or people who work in their city will never set foot on a bus. Another example of the double-standard at work when it comes to funding for transit versus funding for roads.

**wolverine** · May-12-13, 01:40 PM

People don't realize that on a federal or regional level their taxes and user fees are always being shifted around to different communities.

I can thank you all for your financial assistance for the new tile platforms at my subway station, just as you can thank me for my contributions of that new overpass you cross to get to work.

I'm sorry to those communities, but opting out of an RTA is not a choice regardless of whether buses run through your community.

**DetroiterOnTheWestCoast** · May-12-13, 02:44 PM

We all have dark secrets in our past. One of mine: I used to be a Republican.

**canuck** · May-12-13, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by wolverine

People don't realize that on a federal or regional level their taxes and user fees are always being shifted around to different communities.

I can thank you all for your financial assistance for the new tile platforms at my subway station, just as you can thank me for my contributions of that new overpass you cross to get to work.

I'm sorry to those communities, but opting out of an RTA is not a choice regardless of whether buses run through your community.

There should be next to decent bus service to and from any suburb of a major city. This is what a big city is about. If suburbs are left with the mistaken belief that they are small towns in the middle of nowhere, that they dont need to contribute to a metropolitan area, they are clearly not taking in the big picture. At one point, it will be important to remind folks that rooting for the Lions and the Wings is not enough of a commitment to Detroitness maybe, let's hope that this comes sooner than later. Think of Los Angeles and how far that city has come in the past 30 years in terms of integrated transit. Mind you, the municipality is massive. The best way for Detroit metro to get to that point is to merge municipal responsibilities to an extent. The usual package would comprise Police, fire, EMS, school boards, and transit. The strength of a regional police force would certainly be a great leap forward, better security and all that comes with it; investment, real estate value increases etc...

**Honky Tonk** · May-12-13, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

We all have dark secrets in our past. One of mine: I used to be a Republican.

Thanx for sharing. I want all the other posters to give DetroiterOnTheWestCoast a group hug and tell him, it's Ok.

**downtownguy** · May-13-13, 09:34 PM

Originally Posted by canuck

The best way for Detroit metro to get to that point is to merge municipal responsibilities to an extent. The usual package would comprise Police, fire, EMS, school boards, and transit. The strength of a regional police force would certainly be a great leap forward, better security and all that comes with it; investment, real estate value increases etc...

Except that those in Bloomfield, Canton, Sterile Heights, etc., don't think they need the po po and would never "subsidize" the needs of the big city where all the crime [[supposedly) is.

But they wouldn't hesitate for a second to "take over" the CofD Water Department or Belle Isle.