Vote YES for regional transit!

[swingline]

This proposal offers no service whatsoever to the community where I live. My income is totally independent of the local economy, so my "return on investment" will be negative since I'll be spending upwards of $300 per year for services that I won't be able to use. There's also no mention anywhere of a proposed service link from Metro from my city.

As I mentioned, I'm in favor of increased mass transit in the metro area. What I'm not in favor of is a vague plan that benefits some communities, but totally skips over others while charging them more.

Your "return on investment" on your measly $300/yr would have consisted at a minimum of the appreciation of your homestead attributable to the regional economic benefits generated by the creation of an actual working regional mass transit system. That appreciation would have far exceeded $300/yr. It's not a coincidence that regions with mass transit have median home values far in excess of home values in SE Michigan. And that's not just for homes right around the corner from the transit stop. Folks who never use the system get the benefit too.

The "there's nothing in it for me because I'll never ride it" crowd carried the day though. Another example of folks voting against their economic interest. [[A lot of that going around yesterday given what happened at the top of the ticket.) Thankfully, given that childless households far outnumber households with kids, the selfish nothing in it for me crowd usually doesn't carry the day when it comes to school millages.

[Johnnny5]

Your "return on investment" on your measly $300/yr would have consisted at a minimum of the appreciation of your homestead attributable to the regional economic benefits generated by the creation of an actual working regional mass transit system. That appreciation would have far exceeded $300/yr. It's not a coincidence that regions with mass transit have median home values far in excess of home values in SE Michigan. And that's not just for homes right around the corner from the transit stop. Folks who never use the system get the benefit too.

Well thank you for explaining it to me. In that rosy scenario I would get to look forward to the "Appreciation of my homestead" resulting in a further increase in property taxes and still would not see any additional services. What a deal!

[dtowncitylover]

Well thank you for explaining it to me. In that rosy scenario I would get to look forward to the "Appreciation of my homestead" resulting in a further increase in property taxes and still would not see any additional services. What a deal!

Well, you wouldn't have seen an renewal and/or increase for at least 20 years from the RTA and in the that time, who knows if new routes would have been added to SMART into the outcounty. The Master Plan was just a basic framework, it wasn't a finality of how much further we could do. But thank you for your shortsightedness.

Now LA, Seattle, and Atlanta get to build transit systems while we are left in the lurch.

[swingline]

Well thank you for explaining it to me. In that rosy scenario I would get to look forward to the "Appreciation of my homestead" resulting in a further increase in property taxes and still would not see any additional services. What a deal!

So you would prefer that your home's value go down so that you can pay lower taxes? That's a hell of a plan for wealth accumulation.

The Johnny5's of the region may have defeated this important vote but the sharpest blame should be directed at the RTA leadership and the media and communications consultants they hired to promote the millage. The Johnny5 rationale for opposition to any transit that doesn't directly serve them personally was not some kind of under the surface voter viewpoint. That uninformed position is blatantly out in the open in SE Michigan and has held up transit progress in this region for decades. It previously held up progress in other regions as well. But cities like Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, Salt Lake City, Denver, Minneapolis, Charlotte and Portland overcame this ignorance with fact-based creative and informative ballot campaigns that persuaded their voters of the benefits of transit. The RTA and pro-transit people from the top down failed to account for and address the Johnny5 voter and it was a fatal mistake.

As just one example, the common playbook for transit ballot campaigns in other cities involves discussing the benefits of transit oriented development which adds jobs and tax revenue to the region. Billions of dollars of such development have spun off from their transit systems. Nothing like that ever got into any media campaign promoted by the pro-transit groups here. Instead, all we got was a few ads telling us that we needed to vote for the millage so we could help poor car-less people get to their jobs. Of course, that is a good reason to vote for the millage as well but it was never going to win the majority. And certainly it was never going to win with the Trumped up Johnny5 voter living in Lake Orion, Walled Lake or Shelby Township.

This was obvious stuff missed by the pathetic RTA media campaign. We had the wrong people running the show and got a completely ineffective media campaign as a result. Our region is no different in its makeup [[either density-wise or voter-wise) than other regions that have recently voted for and built new mass transit systems. All of these regions are enjoying steady economic growth to which transit is in no small part contributing. Yet we continue to banish ourselves to last place in transit usage and transit dollars spent per person. President Trump would call us losers.

Oh well. Johnny5 has opened my eyes. I'm going to let my house go to hell. Persuade the assessor to lower my taxes. And then I can retire early.

[masterblaster]

Well thank you for explaining it to me. In that rosy scenario I would get to look forward to the "Appreciation of my homestead" resulting in a further increase in property taxes and still would not see any additional services. What a deal!

It's just not economically and logistically feasible to provide regular bus service to every single exurban community in the tri-county area.

Maybe on a daily basis you wouldn't use the regional transit, but what if you wanted to go to a pro sports event downtown and escape the traffic congestion and excessive parking fees downtown? You could park in downtown Pontiac and take the Rapid Bus downtown!

What if you wanted to go check out downtown Ann Arbor or Ypsilanti for a day without putting 90+ miles on your car - you could take the Woodward Rapid Bus to the New Center, and take the commuter train.

What if you needed to get to the Airport to go on a weeklong trip, and wanted to avoid paying the $13/day parking fees in the Big Blue lot? Take the Woodward Rapid Bus downtown and transfer to the Michigan Avenue Rapid Bus, which would take you to the airport.

[Johnnny5]

It's just not economically and logistically feasible to provide regular bus service to every single exurban community in the tri-county area.

I understand that, but you have to offer a community something in return when asking for a fairly large increase in their property taxes.

Maybe on a daily basis you wouldn't use the regional transit, but what if you wanted to go to a pro sports event downtown and escape the traffic congestion and excessive parking fees downtown? You could park in downtown Pontiac and take the Rapid Bus downtown!

What if you wanted to go check out downtown Ann Arbor or Ypsilanti for a day without putting 90+ miles on your car - you could take the Woodward Rapid Bus to the New Center, and take the commuter train.

What if you needed to get to the Airport to go on a weeklong trip, and wanted to avoid paying the $13/day parking fees in the Big Blue lot? Take the Woodward Rapid Bus downtown and transfer to the Michigan Avenue Rapid Bus, which would take you to the airport.

I live in Milford. Looking at the RTA masterplan you'll see that there were no planned services whatsoever in this area of the county. None of the above scenarios would apply to Milford residents, but due to the higher home values they would be paying 7-8x more towards the RTA than the average resident of Detroit.

[Junjie]

I understand that, but you have to offer a community something in return when asking for a fairly large increase in their property taxes.

The benefit is an economically healthier, more attractive metro region with better prospects for growth and economic mobility. I know that sounds nebulous but it's the truth. It never ceases to amaze me that people who live in the Detroit area, which is viewed worldwide as one of the most shocking human disasters in the developed world, can look around and think, "Yes, the development strategy we have chosen for the past six decades should be continued without change."

I live in Milford. Looking at the RTA masterplan you'll see that there were no planned services whatsoever in this area of the county. None of the above scenarios would apply to Milford residents, but due to the higher home values they would be paying 7-8x more towards the RTA than the average resident of Detroit.

You have chosen to live someplace that by definition cannot be effectively served by transit. People who choose to live downtown and minimize their driving get taxed for roads to every subdevelopment, but they'll never use them. Same thing for you here, except that the RTA's plan would be a huge benefit to the region, whereas roads to far-flung developments are almost a pure drain.

[Bham1982]

You have chosen to live someplace that by definition cannot be effectively served by transit. People who choose to live downtown and minimize their driving get taxed for roads to every subdevelopment, but they'll never use them. Same thing for you here, except that the RTA's plan would be a huge benefit to the region, whereas roads to far-flung developments are almost a pure drain.

New roads in places like Milford are almost always paid for through local user fees, usually for homeowners in new subdivisions. It's not really analagous to asking people in Milford to pay for buses in Detroit.

Would there be a way to pass this at a municipality level? Places like Milford probably don't make sense in terms of regional transit. Maybe draw narrower boundaries, and only ask voters within those boundaries? I think, if workable, it's a reasonable compromise.

[dtowncitylover]

New roads in places like Milford are almost always paid for through local user fees, usually for homeowners in new subdivisions. It's not really analagous to asking people in Milford to pay for buses in Detroit.

Would there be a way to pass this at a municipality level? Places like Milford probably don't make sense in terms of regional transit. Maybe draw narrower boundaries, and only ask voters within those boundaries? I think, if workable, it's a reasonable compromise.

But the opt-out is what makes SMART inefficient already! We can't have everyone picking and choosing what infrastructure they want to give towards. REGIONAL transit helps the REGION not one particular community. As well, the 85% clause was to make sure 85% of funds raised in the county would stay in the county. So what 15% of funds may or may not leave? God forbid we should help other residents out. I'm a metro Detroiter, not an Oakland Countier.

I'm not sure why people thought they weren't going to be served, either. The Master Plan was for routes they deemed important NOW. No one said Milford or Richmond or hell Manchester couldn't have service in the future. The Plan was for improving what was currently underserved and extending it some. It wasn't a final thing, it was a step into greater transit.

There's more to infrastructure than roads. How about the electricity? Water? Gas? We are a rubber band region being stretched and stretched and no plan for when we break.

[GMan]

The benefit is an economically healthier, more attractive metro region with better prospects for growth and economic mobility. .........


You have chosen to live someplace that by definition cannot be effectively served by transit. People who choose to live downtown and minimize their driving get taxed for roads to every subdevelopment, but they'll never use them. Same thing for you here, except that the RTA's plan would be a huge benefit to the region, whereas roads to far-flung developments are almost a pure drain.

I think you just proved his point. Asking the outlying areas to subsidize the metro region with a 20 year tax for a bureaucracy with a "vision" of transit is not a good workable plan.

Yes a vibrant metro area is desirable but hitting outlying areas with a tax on their more expensive homes and then not even throwing them a bone like an express bus to this new "Vibrant Metro Area" that you are hoping to create is project doomed to fail.

[swingline]

I live in Milford. Looking at the RTA masterplan you'll see that there were no planned services whatsoever in this area of the county. None of the above scenarios would apply to Milford residents, but due to the higher home values they would be paying 7-8x more towards the RTA than the average resident of Detroit.

It appears that most Milford voters agreed with Johnny5. Let's see why.

Well, the average family household income in Milford is $78,463. The median home value is $303,500. That means that the homeowner of the median valued Milford home would've paid a RTA transit tax of $182. In other words, 0.23% of that homeowner's entire income would have been extracted from them for something that would be of no benefit. [[We can pretend for the sake of argument that effective mass transit would not increase property values across the region.)

You know, when you look at those stark numbers, you can understand why even a generous, charitable, community-minded Christian taxpayer would balk at the confiscation. $.50/day can add up and could be put to better use gassing up the SUV.