Let’s spend our transit taxes on transit

[LTAWACS]

this idea doesn't go far enough.

build a wall around the city. tax entry into the city where gates are situated. if you live in the city and want to return, you have to prove your residence, then the tax is waived. if you haven't come into the city by dusk, the gates close and entry is not allowed unless you are flying into hobby.

oh, and a tax to leave the city too, but that tax would be higher than the entry tax.

the tax would be waived if you travel on mass transit, a bicycle, kayak, or walk.

Place defensive turrets at regular intervals at the top of this wall and you've got yourself a deal.

[samagon]

Place defensive turrets at regular intervals at the top of this wall and you've got yourself a deal.

excellent idea, and thinking about this more, we would really only need a wall from southwest Houston around to northeast Houston, it could be Houston's very own Maginot Line!

[ig2ba]

excellent idea, and thinking about this more, we would really only need a wall from southwest Houston around to northeast Houston, it could be Houston's very own Maginot Line!

Place defensive turrets at regular intervals at the top of this wall and you've got yourself a deal.

You guys are really missing the big picture. The most important reason for building this 80-mile fortress around Houston is when the Rage Virus hits. All indications are that it will start in the UK, so as long as you're an Inner Looper, you'll be safe.

[LTAWACS]

You guys are really missing the big picture. The most important reason for building this 80-mile fortress around Houston is when the Rage Virus hits. All indications are that it will start in the UK, so as long as you're an Inner Looper, you'll be safe.

We're gunna need a moat too then.

[Marksmu]

Ha.

Yes, I will think for once. You are right. Tax and spend is bad. property rights good. East Coast liberal elites bad. Texas bubba good. Me see light now.

Now, back to reality, are you really going to argue that non-residents of Houston who work in the city five times a week actually pay more than they take away? Really? How, because they make their bosses pay? Next, are you going to tell me that they contribute more to the city than residents and property owners?

There is no point in arguing with someone who argues only with their emotions and ignores facts...the fact is that every business in the city pays all of the taxes you want the commuters to pay...the business absorbs the cost of fire/police/ambulance in its rent and property taxes....School Districts loves business as they bring in an enormous sums of money through sales tax, payroll taxes, property tax, personal property taxes, and a multitude of other taxes that are paid by businesses that benefit local communities, while utilizing almost zero public services....how many times a year do you think a business utilizes the fire department vs a resident?

Commuters do flush toilets, drink water, and drive on the roads, but all of those costs are paid by the business where they do those things ...you don't think burger king gets free water/sewer do you?...so please tell me, exactly how are these evil commuters who buy our gas, eat at our resteraunts, get speeding tickets, parking tickets, and dont use our most expensive service (schools) utilizing more services than they are consuming? Commuters are not coming into town to put their kids in public schools, goto our free parks, collect our welfare, and sit in the public library....they are here to work. They come, they contribute, they go home and let some other town pay for the cost of protecting their house. They are contributing substantially more than they are consuming. If you don't think so - then please tell me where all this commuter money is going? It isnt the roads b/c they are paying for that through taxes on their fuel...so how exactly are they draining the city?

You want to see business flee the city - make it too expensive for those businesses to hire employees....they will leave. They always do.

Edited April 20, 2012 by Marksmu

[infinite_jim]

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Mobility-fund-fears-lead-cities-to-join-coalition-3525300.php

[Houston19514]

There are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides, but if we are going to "return" all of the 1% sales tax "transit taxes" (as if roads are not also part of transit), how about we also return all of the nation's highway (gasoline and diesel fuel) taxes to building and maintaining highways. Just sayin' ;-)

Edited May 2, 2012 by Houston19514

[mfastx]

West University is saying if they don't get the roughly $300,000 a year they would have to raise taxes? lol, by how much, like a few dollars per person?

[TheNiche]

West U's population is approximately 15,000, so we're talking about $20 per capita. But considering how little of West U's population is likely to use transit, that seems like a raw deal. If I were a citizen of West U, I'd want out of METRO completely if that's possible. Make the buses go around.

[kylejack]

There's a lot of doctors that take buses to the Med Center. Aside from residents, there's also the people watching their kids and cleaning their houses.

[TheNiche]

According to 2010 Census estimates, there are only 38 employed persons living in West U that commute using public transportation.

Of the broad category that might be doctors (or petroleum engineers, or whatever), there are only 27 citizens. Is that "a lot"? And yeah, if lived in West U, I wouldn't care how my maid came to work; if one candidate can't drive (or walk into the city limits from Houston), then I'd hire the next candidate that can. What the hell would I care?

Public transportation (excluding taxicab): 38 +/-42 Management, business, science, and arts occupations 27 +/-39 Service occupations 0 +/-127 Sales and office occupations 0 +/-127 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 0 +/-127 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 11 +/-18 Military specific occupations 0 +/-127

Edited May 2, 2012 by TheNiche

[mfastx]

West U's population is approximately 15,000, so we're talking about $20 per capita. But considering how little of West U's population is likely to use transit, that seems like a raw deal. If I were a citizen of West U, I'd want out of METRO completely if that's possible. Make the buses go around.

Sorry, I just don't agree with saving suburban citizens $20 over increasing the funding for METRO.

If I lived in West U, I'd want MORE transit, so that I could actually use it.

[TheNiche]

I suspect that those being critical of West U's preference to keep its share of the transportation revenue are also people that wouldn't desire to live there if they could afford it....which is to say, pretty much under any circumstance.

[IHB2]

I suspect that those being critical of West U's preference to keep its share of the transportation revenue are also people that wouldn't desire to live there if they could afford it....which is to say, pretty much under any circumstance.

and I suspect those being critical of any or all of the small municipalities' and the COH's desire to avoid a certain tax increase also believe that politics, specifically the politics of reelection, is not the primary determinant of all municipal policy decisions regarding METRO.

my guess is we'll need boom times again before any elected official even considers restoring the 25% to METRO.

and since the Univ & Uptown lines are probably dependent on the restoration of that % and on fed transit dollars before any ground is broken, I think we're going to have a LRT grid with no east-west axis for many years to come.

[citykid09]

Interesting video from the former Mayor of Houston Kathy Whitmire on why Houston has built the wrong rail system and Honolulu has built the better rail system. I think it applies to this thread perfectly!

[TheNiche]

You had to re-post this drivel on three separate threads simultaneously?

[woolie]

Wait, you posted it in THREE THREADS?

[LTAWACS]

Cool video. She looks... different.

[LTAWACS]

Perhaps this video should be sent to the local goons in office.

[Houston19514]

Perhaps this video should be sent to the local goons in office.

Yes, the ramblings of long-ago office-holders, who earned 20% of the vote in their last attempt at elective office, are always meaningful.

[trymahjong]

Got this in an email---

We urge you to go to the Metro Public meeting on its sales tax to be held March 11 at 9:00 am in 1900 Main in the 2nd Floor METRO Board Room.

Bring your friends to let the METRO Board know of your support for Metro to receive the full one fourth of the transit sales tax back.

If you can't make the Public meeting, you can go to an online letter and let Metro hear of your support. Once you have sent the online letter let your friends know about the meeting and urge them to go to the meeting or send the online letter.

Importance of the Public meeting

on transit sales tax

Why the METRO sales tax is important has been explained in commentaries by David Crossley published by the Houston Chronicle and Houston tomorrow Publications. The following are excepts. For his full commentaries please go to <a href="http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001TV4qgW4kYUyhFR49Q7Z3z7FoMDqj54phadFdbUEkTanw9qKonEzKP1BoKERiS25KTt8il8viHUqJRd9OcmS1NI7ORsv9_Ls3v7sih5GJSs8_sCgXGA90glUh-LGJEYj4znyS5vBL4UkmFlE2jWqU110UIVxdita_NR-bNlac42PAqi3gcfmU9xiihkYt9utL2cPzLMJ4XEcJXFO19veTxhnLphOT1_yPslqZs3DXI_ddM_p00RlCkqIbx3gCwiVq_NejL53bXYM=" rel="nofollow" shape="rect" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">Houston Tomorrow.

According to Crossley, "METRO has allocated over $2.5 billion to the City of Houston and other municipalities through the General Mobility Fund. METRO remits a quarter of its sales tax revenue to the municipalities - the transit agency's only local revenue source from taxpayers. Crossley stated "the percentage METRO sent to the City of Houston and other cities rose as high as 61%, while Bob Lanier was Mayor of Houston".

In addition to the $2.5 billion METRO gave away to the cities, Crossley and Reverend Robert Muhammed point out that METRO missed opportunities for federal matching grants, meaning METRO has lost as much as $5 billion in transit revenue since the General Mobility Fund began in 1988."

Crossley urges the use all of transit taxes for transit but why?

"Indeed, any transit expansion at all other than the current rail construction and two more park-and-ride lots is not going to happen unless we can stop spending our transit taxes on roadway projects."

CTC has heard if the one fourth of the transit sales taxe continues to go out to the cities "METRO which is already shrinking will be well and truly stopped" from adding to their systems beyond work currently in progress until sometime around 2030 or later.

Worth noting David Crossley said "METRO investment in roads goes way beyond the General Mobility Program. More than half a billion dollars of the cost of the three light rail lines now under construction is for street improvements and utilities, replacing worn pavement and substandard drainage along all of those streets. The massive rebuilding of downtown and Midtown was a $200 million program funded by Metro and federal transit funds outside of the General Mobility Program."

Ongoing CTC research so far has found the percentage of tax money spent on roads to be 80%(+/-) and the amount spent on Airport, Rail, Port and Transit 21%(+/-). In the small facts below is economic information to consider.

Small facts

ARRA presented Texas and other states with an opportunity to improve infrastructure and economic conditions in the areas facing the greatest challenges, as well as an opportunity to try out several different types of transportation investment and evaluate their effectiveness. A recent report by the Public Interest Research Group examined ARRA transportation projects nationally and identified trends that would maximize the economic impact of future investment:

* In general, public transportation and road and bridge repairs produce 31 percent and 16 percent more jobs respectively than construction of new roads and bridges;

* On average, repair and maintenance projects spend money and create jobs faster than projects that add new capacity.

* Smaller projects, such as bridge painting, are generally quicker to start than large new projects and are also generally more labor intensive.

* Economic rates of return for new-capacity road projects have been dropping for several years.

Source of small facts and further information can be found on http://texasimpact.org/content/transportation

[infinite_jim]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Metro-hears-from-public-on-street-fund-payments-3553021.php

When the general mobility payments were extended in 2003, the ballot language required another referendum within 10 years. Metro's board is expected in June to approve the ballot language and schedule the election. Its leaders have said they want to continue the payments while finding a way for Metro to recover some of the funds for transit.

[totheskies]

The only fair way to do this is for someone to pay for it. METRO benefits everyone in our region. More people using METRO for transportation means fewer individual cars on the roads. That's less traffic and increased mobility for everyone.

I'm a Texan too. We all have that stupid independent streak of hyper-NIMBYism, but it's got to go. Houston is one of the most rapidly growing regions in the country, and we need to invest in public transit improvements now while we have the chance. As more and more people move here and clog up the freeways, we continue to put our citizenry at risk. This money should rightfully be used 100% to fund public transit.

[TheNiche]

The only fair way to do this is for someone to pay for it. METRO benefits everyone in our region. More people using METRO for transportation means fewer individual cars on the roads. That's less traffic and increased mobility for everyone.

That's simply not true. The benefits of transit are asymmetrical when comparing geographies and households.

For instance, Sugar Land should not be interested in becoming a METRO member because there's already a Park & Ride at the county line to serve its citizens and mitigate congestion along US 59. Meanwhile, if a Sugar Land household with two workers has one commuting to Westchase and another that works for the school district locally, then there's really no practical circumstance whereby METRO will benefit them enough that they should pay taxes toward it.

Likewise, when I used to live around the block from where I worked, METRO could not possibly have benefited me; I didn't need them. Before that, I was a reverse commuter; METRO didn't help. And now that I live close to a light rail line that doesn't go where I want to (and for which there are no plans to expand the system to go where I want to or as fast as I need to), I just commute during off-peak hours and rarely encounter congestion. For me, METRO does not pull its weight.

Houston is one of the most rapidly growing regions in the country, and we need to invest in public transit improvements now while we have the chance. As more and more people move here and clog up the freeways, we continue to put our citizenry at risk.

Just what is the shelf life of an opportunity to invest in public transit? Why is that opportunity perishable, in your eyes? And what is this risk, you speak of? Qualify the proximate cause of the risk and quantify its impact, please.

[woolie]

Just what is the shelf life of an opportunity to invest in public transit? Why is that opportunity perishable, in your eyes? And what is this risk, you speak of? Qualify the proximate cause of the risk and quantify its impact, please.

Uhm, you're just playing around here -- this opportunity cost is a standard infrastructure argument -- it applies equally to freeways, transit, water, electricity, etc. Houston is experiencing a period of dramatic growth -- including higher density developments inside the loop. There is huge value in making it explicitly clear where transit lines will be to shape development to maximize their use. Otherwise we'll be 30 years down the road (again) and trying to retrofit transit into an even more difficult to change landscape, which will fare even more poorly than the current efforts, and require even more compromises. Now, when we play Sim City or China, it's easy to make a modern metro system appear overnight by fiat. But in this world of property rights, (semi) accountable government agencies, and environmental impacts... it's a messy process. Compare Beijing Metro to 2nd Ave Subway.

[woolie]

then there's really no practical circumstance whereby METRO will benefit them enough that they should pay taxes toward it.

I'm married, but I don't have children. I don't plan on ever having children. But I pay about $2,000 every year to HISD.

[woolie]

Actually, it makes me quite sad to think about how this country totally abandoned our cities for 50 years, mostly for incredibly stupid (racial and auto-utopian) reasons. That is a big thousand dollarsing opportunity cost. We're sure eating it now.

[TheNiche]

Uhm, you're just playing around here -- this opportunity cost is a standard infrastructure argument -- it applies equally to freeways, transit, water, electricity, etc. Houston is experiencing a period of dramatic growth -- including higher density developments inside the loop. There is huge value in making it explicitly clear where transit lines will be to shape development to maximize their use. Otherwise we'll be 30 years down the road (again) and trying to retrofit transit into an even more difficult to change landscape, which will fare even more poorly than the current efforts, and require even more compromises. Now, when we play Sim City or China, it's easy to make a modern metro system appear overnight by fiat. But in this world of property rights, (semi) accountable government agencies, and environmental impacts... it's a messy process. Compare Beijing Metro to 2nd Ave Subway.

I'm in favor of making it explicity clear where transit lines will be and fiercely protecting those easements from development. I don't see that we should necessarily be in disagreement.

I'm married, but I don't have children. I don't plan on ever having children. But I pay about $2,000 every year to HISD.

School taxes fund the incarceration of our young people, serving three purposes: 1) to keep them from stealing your car's audio system and then puncturing your tires just for fun, 2) to keep them out of the labor force where they would compete with unskilled labor, and 3) to demonstrate to future employers that 'graduates' of these institutions can commit to a menial existence for more than a few weeks at a time. That children might learn anything is incidental.

I don't believe you should be paying school taxes toward this dysfunctional system; I believe that you should be paying school taxes toward a reformed system that prepares young people for the real world so that they can support a more balanced and viable tax base. However, under no circumstances is school funding analogous to transit funding.

[Houston19514]

On 5/9/2012 at 8:08 PM, citykid09 said:

Interesting video from the former Mayor of Houston Kathy Whitmire on why Houston has built the wrong rail system and Honolulu has built the better rail system. I think it applies to this thread perfectly!

 

Remember this from back in May of 2012, Kathy Whitmire extolling the wonders of Honolulu’s rail system.  Well, it turns out that sometime soon (“early 2023”) the first part of the 20 mile "better rail system" might be completed (yes, you read that right -  more than 10 1/2 years later, it has yet to carry its first passenger). Does anyone think Kathy has figured out why she got 20% of the vote in her last election attempt in Houston?

Edited January 16, 2023 by Houston19514

[004n063]

16 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

Remember this from back in May of 2012, Kathy Whitmire extolling the wonders of Honolulu’s rail system.  We’ll, it turns out that sometime soon (“early 2023”) the first part of the 20 mile line might be completed (yes, you read that right -  more than 10 1/2 years later, it has yet to carry its first passenger).

Yeah, people love to hate on Houston's transit system, but they're only half-right.

The system as a whole is woefully insufficient for a city of 2.3 million and a metro area of 7 million. (Or, if you prefer to think of our car infrastructure as part of the transit system, then it's less insufficient and more inefficient.) We do not have a true metro or regional rail system, and we need both. Only a relatively small ring around downtown is really bikeable, and even then, it can be spotty. And we could probably use some other modes as well (aerial gondolas from East River to Discovery Green and Post, anyone?)

But all of the modes we do have are okay at worst (green, purple, silver lines, some of the bus routes), excellent at best (red line, some of the bus routes, the downtown bike lanes and bayou paths).