The City of Albuquerque, NM voted earlier this month 59%-41% to renew its transportation infrastructure gross receipts tax. We don't often find anything pleasant about tax legislation, but this one made us smile:
Transportation InfrastructureHmmm. So the city of Albuquerque and its various boards & commissions may not spend any of these monies on any rail transportation (e.g. streetcar or trolley), without first subjecting the question of that expenditure to a vote of the people. Why didn't we think of that?
Gross Receipts Tax
Proposing To Impose A One-Quarter Of One Percent Transportation Infrastructure Gross Receipts Tax Which Shall Be Dedicated Specifically And Only For The Following Uses: Not Less Than 31% For Road Rehabilitation; Not More Than 15% For Road Deficiencies; 13% For Road Maintenance; 5% For Trails And Bikeways; And 36% For Transit. No Portion Of The Revenue Generated By The Transportation Infrastructure Gross Receipts Tax Shall Be Used To Build Or Operate Any Rail Transportation System Until Such A System Is Approved At A Separate Election By The Voters Of The City Of Albuquerque.
Background
Since 2000 the City has imposed a voter approved one-quarter cent Transportation Infrastructure Tax that provides funding for road rehabilitation, road maintenance, road deficiencies and transit operations. The existing Transportation Infrastructure Tax contains a sunset provision and the current tax will expire on December 31, 2009. If passed this proposal will extend the one-quarter cent tax.
Help Cincinnati join the growing list of cities who respect their citizens by letting them vote on rail. Vote YES ON ISSUE 9.
They're voting on a tax to fund this. Cincinnati isn't doing that. Opponents of Issue 9 having been pointing out that difference to you for months. It's very simple.
ReplyDeleteJoe -
ReplyDeleteYour "courageous legislator" hero Tyron Yates is supporting Issue 9. HAHA.
Joe,
ReplyDeleteOponents point out that tax increases already require a vote, and that Issue 9 is somehow "unfair" for requiring a vote when no tax is directly involved. They falsely claim that Cincinnati would be unique in singling out rail for special treatment. That's clearly not true.
The State of Texas requires a referendum on all rail projects for cities smaller than 750,000, regardless of tax involvement. Washington state law requires rail plans to appear on the same ballot with the tax which will support it. The City of Boise is in the process of requiring a public vote on any streetcar plan, regardless of tax impct. And Albuquerque requires a second vote to spend transportation taxes on rail, even after the tax itself has already been approved; road monies don't require a 2nd vote.
There's a growing trend around the country of rail people shoving their "solutions" down citizens' throats, and then sticking them with an enormous bill for it later. Taxpayers are retaliating by subjecting rail proposals to extra scrutiny and additional hurdles.
Sorry if you're one of the rail people who's pissed-off by this, but especially in Cincinnati's case, it's entirely deserved.
Great. COAST, if you have so many problems with Cincinnati, I have a few ideas to cities where you can move. Boise, Albuquerque, and Austin come to mind.
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you move if you hate the voters of Cincinnati so much? I'm sure a YP snob like you would fit in just well in Seattle, or Portland.
re: streetcars are for losers...
ReplyDeletethat's exactly what I did. Now my tax money goes to another city for friendly to young progressive people. Keep killing cincinnati buddy.
"that's exactly what I did."
ReplyDeleteYou don't live in Cincinnati? Is your name Bobby Maly? Just another outsider meddling in our City's affairs.
Stop outside, big money special interest meddling in Cincinnati affairs. Stop the streetcar. Vote YES on Issue 9.
Yeah I moved to a different progressive city, wher emy tax dollars and income are spent. Cincinnati's loss...mainly because of clowns like COAST.
ReplyDelete