Tuesday, May 16th, 2006...7:19 am
Vote Today
My polling place is an Odd Fellows Hall. Make from that what you will.
I am voting for all four ballot proposals. I have to say I have serious reservations about 1 and 2. I am concerned that the transit proposals may not get funded until after the roads get built, and road projects always seem to go over budget. But, they managed to get Carolyn Campbell and Jim Click to agree on something, they probably both like it, and both hate it. Sometimes compromise is necessary.
I disagree with my fellow blogger Daniel Patterson, who asks for a no vote on 2. The trouble with this is that the city isn’t authorized to use a gasoline tax. Opponents of both Bob Walkup’s “All Roads” plan four years ago and Steve Farley’s “All Transit” plan two years ago also brought up the funding issue. This issue is a sort of strawman, since cities are very limited in their taxing options, and hoping that the legislature authorizes Tucson to levy a gasoline tax is quixotic.
One agrument I’ve heard against 1 and 2 has been the lack of public input. This argument would be better if it came from people who participated in the public process that existed. One prominent opponent, for example, reportedly showed up to one meeting, read a statement, and left. That isn’t exactly contibuting to the discussion. The words “lack of public participation” must in their minds mean “I didn’t get my way.”
I am more excited about 3 and 4. The city needs a new psychiatric hospital. I am disapointed with John Kromko and Dave Devine, who consider themselves progressive, working so hard against a project that benefits the most desperately needy of our community. I’d be more willing to listen if they had anything resembling an alternative solution.
7 Comments
May 16th, 2006 at 8:40 am
Respectfully to Ted. I, as many of you know, oppose the RTA plan, but have voted for 3 and 4. There are many reasons why…and I did make my voice heard on this issue…it didn’t matter.
1st. Despite the good intentions of Steve Farley and Carolyn Campbell, I think the power brokers did a far better job of negotiating. We are getting some more needed bikes lanes, some bus service, and a street car that will only go about four miles. For that, we ended up giving up on a lot of things. The plan is road widening heavy. The backers of the plan (developers, car dealers, construction interests) sunk $1 Million dollars into selling the plan to you. Why? Because it is about sprawl, building roads and providing connectors to that people can live farther and farther out in the county. The road hooks ups benefit them because it will make it a little faster (and that is arguable) to get into town. The transportation plan is primarily about expanding roads and it will lead to ANTI-conservation qualities…the blading and grading of our deserts.
Second, I live near Grant Road in one of the amazing neighborhoods near Campbell/Grant. I hate it when people say “no one participated” and then chastize us for it when we were ignored and are going to be very affected by the plan. They completely ignored the neighborhoods around Grant…where the widening occurred. When we finally heard about the widening (this is businesses/neighborhoods that will be affected by it) and mobilized (which aint easy Ted)…the plan was set and going to the voters. These neighborhood associations and businesses should have been approached VERY early and brought into the discussion.
Finally, the CAVE piece. If you all don’t know it…the big developers published and mailed a piece calling most of us who are against this plan Citizens Against Most Everything. They blatantly lied and said that we were against families, children, and elderly because we DARED to stand up and argue against it.
We in the Campbell/Grant area feel sold out again. Why should we pay for the sprawl that Marana, Suarhita, Oro Valley, etc. welcomes and even subsidizes. Why should we do what WE can to make their lifestyle choice a little easier?
We can agree to disagree…my only advise to you is to listen a lot to the neighborhoods you are about to represent…and don’t attack them like Steve Farley did.
May 16th, 2006 at 8:53 am
Now…on 3 and 4…since I just vented my spleen on 1 and 2 and am begging you all to reconsider voting for 1 and 2.
On 3 and 4…
There is a national movement that has entered our court system known as therapeutic justice. It acknowledges that some of the behaviors that harm our society are the result of mental illness and addiction. Courts have been crowded with non-violent offenders who need a system of both therapy and punishment. One does not work without the other. The mental health facility built by a bond would provide a place to help people and relieve the stress on our justice system and county health providers. It is needed and we really will have a better community and society for having it.
Best,
Roger
May 16th, 2006 at 10:07 am
Roger-
The CAVE piece was out of line. It probably would have been better directed at the people against 3 & 4 than those who have some valid concerns on 1 & 2.
Ted.
May 16th, 2006 at 10:41 am
I agree Ted…this piece…the whole campaign was just a little arrogant to me…and then that piece really angered me…it offended me. I was convinced early that it would be very hard to stand up against this plan with so many important people backing it. I was rather cowardly early on while others like Ken O’Day had real freaking guts to speak out and debate it! He gets a profile in courage in my book.
What bugs me about CAVE and the those on the YES side…even the Democratic leaders…as well, is this. I am VERY involved in my community. I do things that I can contribute most with…and many of the things that I do, like others, are not big sexy stuff…but I believe in them. Along with that, I work and have a life. Remember what I am about to say please…and I don’t mean to be condescending. So many that you will represent (because I want you to win) will be very good people who don’t have time to go to RTA meetings…they have families…they have kids…and are not paid to do these things. The people who will visit you will generally have a big stake in something happening. They have time to visit you. Always think about why? Someone HAS to find out what average folks who don’t have time like and desire from government. Participatory democracy is about identifying potential silent stakeholders…trying to include them…or at least have someone speak for them. I hate it when we sometimes say “well you COULD have come out to the meeting…so you lost your say.” That is the arrogance of government and democracy that for so long has allowed the powerful and the wealthy to have more voice. They can AFFORD to attend…and if they can’t…they will send a lobbyist. This is why the last few plans failed. This is why people mobilized to fight it. A good government official would have considered this, approached them, and really talked. If this plan goes down…this is why.
I am most most disappointed that Steve Farley’s name was on that CAVE piece…and after so many of us asked him to disavow his connection to it…we have still heard nothing. It also looks a little odd that he had so many commercials paid for by YES! where he backed it, so many speaking engagements on TV, and now some of the RTA folks on his website as supporters. His name recognition is high right now which will help in the election…BUT…some of us here in LD 28 think we are getting the brunt of this plan…and that he treated us a badly when we dissented. I am not sure I trust his ambition.
Respectfully to you Ted…and to others, I hope you will reconsider voting for the RTA 1 and 2. If you don’t like it…and feel unsure…then just vote for 3 and 4…and as I always say…no one will ever know how you REALLY vote when you go in that box (smile).
best to you!
Roger
May 16th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
For those of you that are still up on the air on 3 & 4 (not that there will be many on this blog), SEIU Arizona, which has more than 2000 supporters among Pima County Employees, overwhelmingly endorsed 3 & 4. Pima County Employees, from the health care fields to the courts to our detention officers, strongly believe that the therapeutic approach is key to aiding people in need, reducing crime, and streamlining County Government.
Please vote yes on #3 and #4.
May 16th, 2006 at 5:01 pm
*keeps quiet about her vote for the same ol’ same ol’.*
May 17th, 2006 at 9:19 am
Am obviously happy about 3 and 4 passing…and disappointed about 1 and 2. Congrats to the proponents on winning. The best way to lose with dignity is to make your voice heard and to work to help implement the program. Apply for those committees Citizens Advisory Committees…let your voice be heard…and help build that community that you want.