How HAIFers vote.

[ricco67]

I figure this will be interesting to see the numbers.

Please only participate if you have voted or WILL vote.

If editor would kindly close the poll a week after elections.

[Marksmu]

I figure this will be interesting to see the numbers.

Please only participate if you have voted or WILL vote.

If editor would kindly close the poll a week after elections.

I dont understand how anyone can support proposition one. It is a drainage slush fund. No defined projects, and it is not being kept separately in accounting for flood purposes only....it will not necessarily be used to alleviate flooding where it is needed most....The money collected (*supposedly*) goes directly to the general fund of the city. Also, we already pay a tax to the harris county flood control district for drainage....I just do not see this as anything more than the city needing more money to keep up their current level of spending rather than cutting costs and becoming more efficient. Also, you will notice that houston's more expensive areas (River Oaks, West U, etc) do not flood....thats not because they receive disproportionate amounts of flood control money, its because they are built on higher (more expensive) ground. The areas that flood are definitively lower income, so this is just another tax that redistributes peoples income. Everyone will pay, but most of the projects that will likely be completed will have much larger impacts on lower income areas, than on everyone else...Its just another tax.

As to prop 3 - I do not like red light cameras, but I do not run red lights either, so while I voted against them entirely on principal (especially the right turn camera...thats total BS)- I would rather keep the cameras and use that money to do flood work, than create yet another tax that will supposedly be used for one thing, and then as it turns out will be used for another. If we are going to raise more money, we may as well raise it from people who are breaking the law or being stupid rather than folks just trying to get by.

Im ambivalent on Prop 2....dont really care either way...

[west20th]

I dont understand how anyone can support proposition one. It is a drainage slush fund. No defined projects, and it is not being kept separately in accounting for flood purposes only....it will not necessarily be used to alleviate flooding where it is needed most....The money collected (*supposedly*) goes directly to the general fund of the city. Also, we already pay a tax to the harris county flood control district for drainage....I just do not see this as anything more than the city needing more money to keep up their current level of spending rather than cutting costs and becoming more efficient. Also, you will notice that houston's more expensive areas (River Oaks, West U, etc) do not flood....thats not because they receive disproportionate amounts of flood control money, its because they are built on higher (more expensive) ground. The areas that flood are definitively lower income, so this is just another tax that redistributes peoples income. Everyone will pay, but most of the projects that will likely be completed will have much larger impacts on lower income areas, than on everyone else...Its just another tax.

As to prop 3 - I do not like red light cameras, but I do not run red lights either, so while I voted against them entirely on principal (especially the right turn camera...thats total BS)- I would rather keep the cameras and use that money to do flood work, than create yet another tax that will supposedly be used for one thing, and then as it turns out will be used for another. If we are going to raise more money, we may as well raise it from people who are breaking the law or being stupid rather than folks just trying to get by.

Im ambivalent on Prop 2....dont really care either way...

Yes, another ploy to keep rich people down. 6th ward, Midtown, Med Center, Downtown, Westchase, parts of Memorial, Museum district, Montrose etc. etc. etc. are poor areas? The Heights was a poor area until recently. When you have an area that is essentially flat, where high ground is in the 40-50 elevations, there are no safe areas where floods are concerned. If you were confident in your point that this is only about "income redistribution" why do you need to pull facts out of your behind to prove your point.

Also, if I thought everything and every topic was about class warfare I might suggest that no area around Houston is flood resistent. Some are engineered that way because, dare I say, they are wealthy areas. How about all those rich people hogging all of those flood control projects.

[WAZ]

Yes, another ploy to keep rich people down. 6th ward, Midtown, Med Center, Downtown, Westchase, parts of Memorial, Museum district, Montrose etc. etc. etc. are poor areas? The Heights was a poor area until recently. When you have an area that is essentially flat, where high ground is in the 40-50 elevations, there are no safe areas where floods are concerned. If you were confident in your point that this is only about "income redistribution" why do you need to pull facts out of your behind to prove your point.

Also, if I thought everything and every topic was about class warfare I might suggest that no area around Houston is flood resistent. Some are engineered that way because, dare I say, they are wealthy areas. How about all those rich people hogging all of those flood control projects.

Once again, I should remind people that Proposition 1 is not just about flood control. It's about roads, too. Just remember this when you're in the voting booth.

I suppose it's Renew Houston's fault that people missing the part about roads. Their PR campaign has concentrated way too much on flooding. And the ad they put on TV doesn't help.

[RedScare]

Also, you will notice that houston's more expensive areas (River Oaks, West U, etc) do not flood....thats not because they receive disproportionate amounts of flood control money, its because they are built on higher (more expensive) ground. The areas that flood are definitively lower income, so this is just another tax that redistributes peoples income. Everyone will pay, but most of the projects that will likely be completed will have much larger impacts on lower income areas, than on everyone else...Its just another tax.

Really? Then what do you think the City installed those two massive box culverts under Kirby Drive for...pedestrian walkways for River Oaks dog walkers?

http://blogs.har.com/774/12261/Pictures-of-the-Historic-Preservation-Ordinance-and-How-It-Affects-the-Houston-Heights

I suppose you did not live here in 2001, when both the Medical Center and the Downtown tunnels and courthouses flooded...decidedly NOT low income areas. Oh, and try finding a house in Bellaire or West U that is NOT in the flood plain.

http://maps2.tsarp.org/tsarp/

NOTE: I am still opposed to this proposition, in spite of your uneducated post.

[TheNiche]

TSARP would actually seem to support marksmu on this one.

http://www.tsarp.org/maps/map5.html

[Fringe]

I like Proposition 1 because it does not exempt churches and schools which to me should not be exempted from ANY tax. 

[Materene]

I like Proposition 1 because it does not exempt churches and schools which to me should not be exempted from ANY tax. 

All the Churches with the exception of a few mega Churches are stone dead broke! They can't even pay the light bill, this is why you see the ownership of all the small independent Churches returning to the Largest Church of the umbrella or one with the most membership and funds. Very likely you would never see any tax revenues from Churches simply because they don't profit any longer.