County commissioners throw support behind transit tax
wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/move...Posted Jul 11, 2019, 10:54 AM UTC
074
wcpo.com
[deleted]
6
Apparently .8/.9 (I forget which) could help support 4 (!!!) BRT routes, which would be freaking awesome! Push for this!
4
Personally while I would love BRT I think it's just a final nail in the coffin for transit in this area if it fails.
Metro/Sorta is not looked at kindly in the area. They are severely underfunded mind you, but they also are poorly managed and have always been.
Id much rather see that .8/.9 go towards light rail or a streetcar extension up to Clifton and the east side. More people would ride that and it would encourage economic development along the route.
0
Metro Moves was a 0.5% tax increase and would have brought light rail to the region.
This is a 0.7% tax increase and only buys some increased bus service.
Incredible.
4
Hamilton County is getting with the times and backing a tax for an underfunded transit system. COTA, which serves Franklin County, has a 0.25 permanent tax and a 0.25 renewal tax. This is a no-brainer. The campaign needs to run ads showing that people of all classes rely on transit for employment and how the system promotes economic development in the region.
Unfortunately, the 800-pound gorilla that stands between the tax passing or failing is the city's streetcar system.
2
The 800-pound gorilla in the room is the Enquirer. The moment they decide they’re more interested in representing issues sensibly than gaming issues for click bait, the city will instantly be better off.
10
I think you're referring to 700 WLW. They're more baity than The Enquirer.
4
I figure the 700 WLWs of the world will always exist, but our daily paper should be better than it is. (Until it gets there, I encourage folks to read the Courier)
5
[removed]
1
We restrict new accounts from making a comment. If the post is urgent please contact us via modmail to get your post approved otherwise wait a few days and resubmit. Please include this link in your modmail https://www.reddit.com/r/cincinnati/comments/cbubv2/county_commissioners_throw_support_behind_transit/etj6xm2/?context=3
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
OP, using the other tag for editorializing is not the intention of the other tag. We have a tag for politics and you should have used it.
1†
Thank you. That tag was completely unnecessary.
4
Whoa, my sincerest apologies. I suppose the next thing you'll tell me is that the subreddit rules are to be applied uniformly.
-9
[removed]
1
We restrict new accounts from making a comment. If the post is urgent please contact us via modmail to get your post approved otherwise wait a few days and resubmit. Please include this link in your modmail https://www.reddit.com/r/cincinnati/comments/cbubv2/county_commissioners_throw_support_behind_transit/etisubc/
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-1
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
-1
this is a thing OP likes to do apparently
3
Someone on the internet said something I don't like.
-3†
Republicans will oppose anything that helps the working class get to work on time.
-6†
In an attempt to preserve space for discussion, I think it's more about a lack of perceived value in what taxes are used for. You could argue that it doesn't make sense to reduce tax funding around a category such as transportation when this city has significant, road-based infrastructure issues, particularly with winter right around the corner. But I am sure they have what sounds like a good argument to them.
This idea of zero taxes sounds great as a campaign stump speech, but it's objectively impractical in real life.
Boosting funding for metro ensures buses are in good working order and that there are enough stops to meet with demand. Anything that reduces traffic around the city is a net gain overall, even if you yourself live alone in your basement and never leave.
6
You lost me when you talked about the “City”, when this tax is for the County. Those outside the City in Hamilton County are where the main obstacle for passing the tax comes from. ONE of the motivations against public transit in the area is that the Suburbs fear the poor, which historically also was linked with race, and don’t want them to get into their suburbs. Just like Republicans use immigration to gin up fear in National politics, the same has been done on every public transit effort and will be done again.
I look to surbanite people to not fall for that propaganda and instead help make it easier for working people to get to work. At the same time, they can help the environment with a better mass transit system that can reduce emissions.
-2†
“Poor” is historically linked with “race” because an entire generation of African American families was denied the ability to build wealth due to red lining and highway building.
And it was perpetrated by white male democrats (hello), just so folks don’t think I’m being disingenuous.
5
Not many white male Dems in the Suburbs or Exurbs of the Metro area.
-1
Use a regressive tax on low-income people because racism or something.
-3
I agree in principle that progressive taxation yields better results for ubiquitous goods (i.e. the “commons”). Still, a regressive tax to provide an indispensable resource is better than no tax and no resource.
But hey, you’re the one who lives in Indian Hill, you think a progressive transit tax would fare better in the suburbs? Let’s do it.
1
So, you proposing a County income tax?
-1
As a republican, I think my biggest issue with it is how poorly SORTA is already run, I do not think throwing money at it will fix the problem. I think it's time for the government to relinquish its grip on public transit and give it back to private entitys. Entitys that can innovate and progress the system. Right now 13 unnelected government officials run it and it is clear that the lack of accountability is poisoning our transit system. A PPP seems like the best option to make everyone happy, (except the corrupt).
1†
Perhaps your point has merit, but I am wondering what you mean when you say “give it back to private entities.” Was the city’s rail network once privately owned? Were its buses?
5
Yes, it was made a government agency in 1973.
4
Ah, I’ll have to do some research, thanks!
1
[deleted]
1
PPPs are government subsidized, roads are government funded. Currently Sorta is government funded, I don't think it should be.
1
[deleted]
2
I think my biggest issue with it is how poorly SORTA is already run
This is a classic example of "Starve the Beast" politics working as intended. Decrease funds, hire crappier leaders who will take the lower salary, watch it run itself into the ground with no visionaries at the helm. Throwing more money at the issue probably won't save it, but it won't hurt either.
Edit: more thoughts
Privatizing something meant for the social good is not a wise idea. It adds incentive to strip routes that aren't turning profit leading to underserved areas likely stratified by class. Even a nonprofit will have to carefully weigh where and when they deploy their services leading to black holes in the map. You can argue these underserved routes can be subsidized by tax dollars, and I would return how well that worked when the FCC added a broadband buildout tax to telecommunications bills that went to the likes of Verizon or Comcast who did exactly dick with it, but I'm sure that extra money made for some fine bonuses.
1
Starve the beast
"Starving the beast" is a political strategy used by budget hawks to limit government spending by cutting taxes.
The term "the beast", in this context, refers to the United States Federal Government, which funds numerous programs and government agencies using mainly American taxpayer dollars. These programs include: Defense, education, welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.
On July 14, 1978, economist Alan Greenspan testified to the U.S. Finance Committee: "Let us remember that the basic purpose of any tax cut program in today's environment is to reduce the momentum of expenditure growth by restraining the amount of revenue available and trust that there is a political limit to deficit spending."Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes.
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
1
The FCC is unnelected too, therefore reinforcing my point. It's not just my opinion that PPP are better look at Japan and Hawaii, two places that have award winning bus systems run by PPPs. Carefully weighing where and when services are needed is what is supposed to happen, it isn't like there is unlimited funds. Because SORTA is a government agency they are too afraid of bad publicity to make the hard choices for the greater good.
0
Japan and Hawaii are also literally islands. Part of SORTAs problem is that its not a regional transit authority versus the region that is the MSA.
1
Of course the county supports a tax. We are a Democrat county after all. The money will be put to good use and not wasted in any way. As the mayor of Cincinnati, I promise this.
-11
[deleted]
1†
Please take your hateful speech elsewhere. We don't tolerate your kind of hate speech. Thanks and bye.
-8
Stripping away the troll-job sarcasm, your underlying point doesn’t make sense. Cranley won reelection by playing the boogeyman card to pander to voters in west side and east side suburbs, the same voters who are likely to vote down a transit tax increase. Honestly I don’t mind if you troll, but at least be good at it.
0
I thought only city residents voted on mayor?
2
Yeah, I meant the Hyde Park area (out to Mt. Washington) and the West side (Price Hill/Westwood)
1
So those small areas, in comparison to the rest of the city, can swing a vote/election that much?
1
Democrat county
*Democratic. Democrat isn't an adjective.
-1
Do we want to be a city of the car or a city of multi-modal transit? That’s the question. Anything less than .8 cent increase keeps us on the car path.
Personally when I think of great cities, what makes them great is density and reliable transit. That’s why European cities are so, so much better than American cities, and why a place like Toronto is so much better than a place like Dallas.
Let’s do the full cent. The alternative is further strangling ourselves on our own suburban growth, meaning worse traffic and more general misery.
Edit: lol at the downvotes from people who won’t make a counter argument, but perhaps would rather continue to wallow in suburbia, so one day they can die there believing they lived a different sort of life
I agree, suburban growth is very bad for Cincinnati and any city. Need more people to move into the city that has money.
Stupid example but I see all the cool places for the upcoming burger week are downtown, and it saddens me I won't visit most of them just because I don't want to fuck with getting down there on perpetually under-construction freeways. Pregame - train to some random point downtown - burger - home. Easy
Only way to get train is have more people with money move downtown. More money means better homes, which means more taxes which means more money for the government to spend on public transit projects.
I think it is that they have a deep history, not because they crowded and transit.
They do have a deep history; so does Cincinnati. Indeed if history were all that a city needed to succeed, then Cincinnati would be among the most successful cities in the country. We aren’t. (Not that we’re struggling, but we aren’t living up to our potential either.)
Generally, having spent many years in Europe, my experience is that cities thrive there due to sound urban policy. The same is true of Asian cities. America differs because of a century of exclusive reliance on the automobile.
Cincinnati is a new city compared to Paris, London, Rome. They have a deep history, Cincinnati just has a history.
You are also comparing huge cities (million+ people) to Cincinnati that is barely 300k+ and been on a decline since 1960.
New York city has arguably a better transit system than most European cities, but it is less dense than Paris and a couple others.
The major difference again is history (age). US cities didn't start to take off until late 1700s. Cincinnati was founded in 1788. European cities were already well established by then, London was already 1700+ years old by then. US was able to built out, they were not limited too much to being easily walk-able.
Sorry but you’re wrong about most of that—not entirely about the history party, or that Cincinnati is new compared to Paris or London, but the rest doesn’t follow from the premises. Also, don’t use municipal boundaries in determining city size or growth. It creates a false portrait of history (and, again, doesn’t support your argument, but in fact supports mine.)
Sorry you don't like Cincinnati nor American cities.
Edit: And you can die in an American city you apparently don't like.
What a passive aggressive response.
In fact I love this city, but just so you don’t feel offended, I’ll revise: it’s why a city like Minneapolis is so much better than a city like St. Louis. There, feel better?
Gonna be honest, I love this city sometimes, but most of the time yeah, I don’t like Cincinnati.
We are a backwards ass city that can be extremely frustrating to live in. Any hint of anti car policy (see liberty street, streetcar, bus levy, etc) gets met with vicious backlash which just keeps us right where this city loves, smack dab in the middle.
So yeah,I hate this city. Everyone is so damn afraid of change.
We need our own Pete Buttigieg in the worst way, a strategy-minded, technocratic unifier with communication skills. PG is probably the closest thing to it, but you just won’t know until he’s in that position.
I don't want a mayor who accepts money from corporate interests. We've been down this road the last decade and it is time for a pivot.
Agreed. I have a very love hate relationship with this city. Cincinnati has so much history, and potential because of that history. But we just throw that away in favor of anti-urban policies and decisions which is a shame.